Massawyrm loves the everloving shit out of TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON

Fuck. Yes. Absent are the stepandfetchbots. Exiled is every bit of robot genitalia. And someone even told the Transformers to empty their bladders before the movie. Just about everything terrible that has come to annoy the living shit out of fans from the last two movies is gone. What’s left? Pure unadulterated Michael Bay for two hours and forty minutes. You read that right. Robots, cars and explosions for two hours and forty minutes. If that sounds terrible to you, then seriously, what the fuck are you doing even thinking about seeing a Michael Bay movie? If you’re still holding out hope that Bay has discovered such subtle nuances as “story”, “character” or “dialog” then I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Those ain’t his bag. Bay is the reigning king of blowing shit up, and here he manages to outdo even himself. And if that’s what you want out of TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON then you will clap and giggle like a three year old tasting ice cream for the first time.

Bay attacked this thing like he had something to prove, and let’s face it, he did. After the complete and utter mess that was TRANFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN - a film for which even his most devoted and diehard fans wanted to see him on the receiving end of a CALIGULA wedding scene re-enactment – he needed to come back and be all the Bay he could be. And boy howdy, did he. But not only did he make a better film than the second (by a wide margin) he managed to make an even better film than the first. The first film wowed us with giant robots; this film wows us with giant robots going positively medieval on one another while tearing apart an entire city doing it.

You have never seen destruction on the level that this film unleashes in its final act. Never. Humans are slaughtered wholesale, the Autobots finally grow a pair and unleash an unholy vengeance on the Decepticons and buildings get used as weapons. This is summer spectacle at its most unbelievable. It puts every alien invasion movie you’ve ever seen to shame. And it is far and away meaner than either of the previous films. There’s a part of me that wishes Bay could put out an R-rated cut – which wouldn’t take much to accomplish – and I can’t help but think that Bay has a version like that for himself to watch at home.

If you’re the type of person excited for this, hoping for a film that trumps the previous films, you will lose your geek mind for this. Optimus finally becomes the badass we’ve always wanted him to be, Transformers on both sides die left and right – each getting a death the film earns time and again – and every desire you might have to see robots take each other apart piece by piece will be sated.

But if you’re hoping that this is nothing but ruthless, cold blooded genre filmmaking, you’re expecting a bit too much. There’s still plenty of moments for the kids. The two annoying mini-bots are back, there’s a bevy of silly characters and bits of childish comedy sprinkled throughout; fortunately, these scenes are brief, painless and moved past very quickly. This is the kind of thing that will kill at the multiplexes but will get grumbled about endlessly and edited out in some online fanedit. But there isn’t one moment in the film you can single out like the Devastator testicles or Bumblebee pissing on Turturro; the film simply never gets that moronic.

The only complaints you’re going to really hear out of this are going to be those that you always hear about Michael Bay films. Does he have a lot of slick slow-mos? Yep. Jingoistic moments complete with a waving flag. Uh huh. A juvenile objectification of women? Definitely…this time in 3D. A reliance on action in lieu of character development. Perpetually. If this stuff boils your blood, then you have no business being anywhere near a theater showing this. Odds are you won’t be able to hear MIDNIGHT IN PARIS over the rumble of this three auditoriums over anyway. The only thing you’ll find different from every other Bay film is that someone finally told him that when something is happening simultaneously all over the world, it probably shouldn’t be afternoon everywhere when it does. He’s discovered how the sun works.

This thing is awesome. It never lags, always one ups itself and it even makes sure that this time around every single character has something cool to do – even the most tertiary of characters gets their moment in the sun. It’s not high art; it is Transformers. And if robots smashing together and tearing each other’s heads off sounds like something you’re ready to sign on for, this movie will tickle your inner thirteen year old until he pisses himself.

I shudder to think what Michael Bay has in mind to ever top this. Frankly, I don’t know if he can. It’s not the best film he’s ever made, but it is the best TRANSFORMERS film he’s ever made; in fact, this is the very best TRANSFORMERS anything ever made. And it is a spectacle that has to be seen to be believed.

He is best reviewer/writer on here...at least gives me pause. I don't think I'll see this at the theater, but it is tempting because of the 3D....which Massa really didin't mention.
Oh well should be a fun download in a few months.

TF3 has been universally panned. But not here.
I know they gave you production visits, but what else?
I can't imagine that was enough to buy 4 (so far) glowing reviews.
This site is getting embarrassing. Not one reviewer has any honor and is not willing to be bought and paid for.

Harry gets excited if there's a pattern on his kitchen roll. He was always going to like this. So his opinion isn't valid. Ever. Capone, he may hate it but he's going to love watching Chicago get the shit kicked out of it so he'll be biased. Quint liked it.... I was getting worried. Then you, you twat, when I hoped someone was going to grow a set and tell us and Bay that he'd fucked up once again only go and fucking like it too!!! Shit, I'm gonna have to see this now and hope that I'm not fucked up the arse by a second shitty Transformer movie (I liked the first one strangely) and not be given a reach around or taken for a meal before hand for my time. You prick.

"It's a Transformers movie, what do you expect?" "It's a Michael Bay movie, what do you expect?" I expect shit, but would like a story that I give two shits about. It really isn't that much to ask, given that these characters have been around for over 20 years - there's gotta be a story worth telling in there somewhere.
Will I see it? Yeah, probably, doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer the robots to actually be the stars, or for me to be invested in any of the characters.

Jeez, get less predictable. Not every positive review means the reviewer is lying. Of COURSE the reviews will be higher here. You have 4 AICN geeks who are happy that the 3rd film is a big improvement over the last one. Not a surprise that they are more positive than the bulk of reviewers on RT. It is not a conspiracy. A bunch of AICN film geeks are going to be a lot more positive and forgiving than the mainstream who is ready to hate this film or anything Bay just on principle. Not that I have hope for this film after the last two, but I can see where the reviews come from.

Because 'splosions just aren't enough to shell out my hard earned cash no matter how big and loud they are. Every review here is the same: "Everything about this movie sucks ass but the big timey 'splosions in 3D make it the best movie of the year!!!" C'mon guys, I thought you were better than that.

Sounds like total balls-to-the-wall action, destruction, and kinetic 3D summer awesomeness. Just the kind of thing that drives haters to cite Rotten Tomatoes ratings in a pointless effort to make sense of it all.

It's interesting to read the way the reviewers are trying to put their honest opinion into the bought-and-paid for reviews we're seeing. Aren't the reviewers at AICN supposed to be movie geeks? As in, the kind of people who value stuff like plot, character, and internal logic in their films? Thus far, all of them have said that none of those appear in this movie and that the reasons to see it are:
a) Innovative use of 3D, which, ok, but mostly 3D has been an annoyance in my experience watching movies.
b) A 3D shot of a model's chest (we're not in the '80s anymore...everyone can see naked people whenever they want to, I'm not sure why this is a draw)
c) The robots smash each other up a lot. Except, violence minus stakes we care about is just boring, and we all know that, because we've seen the Phantom Menace.
Michael Bay doesn't get a pass, as a filmmaker, for abandoning the most basic elements of storytelling just because he's a perpetual adolescent . He doesn't get one because he needs to put in jokes "for the kids"; no great movie aimed at kids has the kind of "jokes" Bay likes to use. And he doesn't get one because he was "put on Earth to blow stuff up"; there are lots of directors capable of putting explosions on screen. It sort of sounds like he'd do better as an effects specialist or a DP than he does as a director (artistically, I mean...financially I get it).
But that's not the point. The quality of every Michael Bay film is inversely proportional to the amount of creative control he has, and we all know it. The point is that the quality of Ain't it Cool News, which used to be a good site on which to get an honest appraisal of geek-culture films from people who love that culture AND who love movies, has been utterly compromised. They've become Ugo or MTV, a site existing to act as propaganda for big-market movies in exchange for perks.
Geeks have a bad reputation for shouting obscenities and generally being impossible to satisfy, but there's a logic behind that attitude, and it's this: every time somebody like Michael Bay, Joel Schumacher, Uwe Boll, Paul WS Anderson, Brett Ratner, etc. (oh, and welcome to the list, Martin Campell) are allowed to take a property from comics or video games or some source we as geeks care about and put it on the big screen with no respect for why it's loved enough to be a hot property in the first place, or with a schizophrenic narrative and more interest in marketing than storytelling, we are being insulted. We are being called stupid, we are being called immature, and we are being called gullible.
Every penny Michael Bay makes from this abomination of a film will add to his legitimacy and to his ability to buy out the credibility of sites like this that should be for people who are serious - geekily, joyously serious - about great films featuring ridiculous things like giant talking robots. And that's depressing.

But is it a good Transformers movie? Is there anything in this that redeems the series for those that grew up with the toys/tv series?
I was ambivalent toward the first, stayed away from the second, and am sorta wanting to see this one.

That's interesting, somebody has written a review here that actually seems to contain an opinion and an actual feeling about the film, agreed with or not, that could be considered pretty cool. It almost makes me want to go see it, I mean where the hell has this guy been? This review really understands the dynamic between Michael Bay's weaknesses and strengths, and gives me hope maybe we're getting a leaner, meaner Michael Bay.. Look, I mean I don't HATE the fucking guy, but Massawyrm's review highlights what strengths Bay DOES have.. like another talkbacker so eloquently put it, he is what he is.. and if Michael Bay's game was at the level of say, a Christopher Nolan's in his own genre, he really could produce true art. I mean he's really great at special effects and cinematography, and his movies always look beautiful in their own stunning on the outside rotting ass stinking fucking corpse on the inside sort of unique snowflake way.. the problem is he tries to interject his other aspects of his personality and ego that are severely brain-damaged/coke burnedout, ie humor/intelligence/wit/depth/love/compassion/rationale/sex/ideas/emotions, he tries to put too much of HIMSELF in there instead of being humble in the face of the true talent he DOES have and bowing down and honoring THAT and following THAT for guidance and creativity. HE should be the slave to his own unique talent and gifts, not the other way around. Anyways, great review, I would say you're the new Frank Oz, but I forgot whereever I had been going with that and Copernicus still out-badasses you, but it was an interesting unapologetic read.

Honestly, I don't care either way about the reviews. I go into movies with an open mind and like to judge them myself... its a radical concept, i know. This film has gotten largely positive reviews from almost every site I go on(here, HitFix, Slashfilm, Arrowinthehead), but that doesn't change anything for me. I liked the first film, hated the 2nd, and am excited to see what a talented action director like Bay does with the 3D tech.
The Transformers films are 1-for-2 so far in my book, so its up to part 3 to sway me in either director. Guess I'll find out tomorrow.

June 28, 2011, 7:15 p.m. CST

by Relugus

Yet another Transformers review which makes little mention of the robot characters.
We get to see Transformers die, says Massawyrm, but, I'd rather we got to see the TFs living, you know, as proper characters.
As for Optimus Prime being "badass", he's not really supposed to be "baddas", the whole point of Optimus is that he's a reluctant warrior. He's not a killing machine.
But then, Bay defines a hero as someone who kills lots of "enemies". Bayformers misses the whole point of Optimus Prime.
Bay, a man who insisted on the robots having lots of "doo-dads" (purely to show off clever CGI and be the biggest dick in Hollywood. CGI as penis substitute.
See, if he had gone for more simple, elegant designs, the robots would have actually got screen time and would be able to emote. But Bay does not want that, he thinks of the Transformers as machines.
The Bayformers trilogy has the feel of fan-fiction made by someone who hates and does not understand the source material he is working from.
With the exception of Cullen, the voices of the TFs are generic and half-assed, no real thought has gone into the TFs as characters.
If you have not watched the fan-made Transformers: The War Within on Youtube, you fucking well should, to see Transformers done properly.
Can't we have a Transformers film that is actually about the Transformers?
But then I remembered, in Hollywood, robots acan only be cute pets or rampaging killing machines.

Aww...well, geeks of all stripes also like to pick fights and make veiled ad hominem attacks, so I can't fault you for that. And I'd never fault anyone for loving action, suspense, or fun. I just happen to know that those things work better with a minimum of visual and narrative logic that Bay and the other directors I mentioned have repeatedly demonstrated that they can't muster up. Anyway, thanks for reading my (apparantly Quixotic) post.

...when they have given countless other films (based on nothing more than action and destruction) a free pass. The hypocrisy is astounding...and the stunned sense of confusion on these boards is hilarious.

Yet another Transformers review which makes little mention of the robot characters.
We get to see Transformers die, says Massawyrm, but, I'd rather we got to see the TFs living, you know, as proper characters.
As for Optimus Prime being "badass", he's not really supposed to be "baddas", the whole point of Optimus is that he's a reluctant warrior. He's not a killing machine.
But then, Bay defines a hero as someone who kills lots of "enemies". Bayformers misses the whole point of Optimus Prime.
Bay, a man who insisted on the robots having lots of "doo-dads" (purely to show off clever CGI and be the biggest dick in Hollywood. CGI as penis substitute.
See, if he had gone for more simple, elegant designs, the robots would have actually got screen time and would be able to emote. But Bay does not want that, because he thinks of the Transformers as machines.
The Bayformers trilogy has the feel of fan-fiction made by someone who hates and does not understand the source material he is working from.
With the exception of Cullen, the voices of the TFs are generic and half-assed, no real thought has gone into the TFs as characters.
If you have not watched the fan-made Transformers: The War Within on Youtube, you fucking well should, to see Transformers done properly.
Can't we have a Transformers film that is actually about the Transformers?
But then I remembered, in Hollywood, robots acan only be cute pets or rampaging killing machines.
Its a shame Spielberg and Bay prevented Murphy and DeSanto from making a true TF adaptation.

I thought the first was just 'ok' The second was utter shit but this third effort was actually pretty entertaining. You can now see what is going on in the fights, but some of the robots don't talk much and there are serious lapses in logic.

Even the main reviewers are plants these days. HOWEVER, what begs the question is this...why the need for the plants when you all KNOW you're gonna see this regardless of the sheer excrement present onscreen for Turn Off The Dark Side of the Moon, or whatever the fratricide the 2nd movie was called??? You're all gonna kiss Bay's ass from here till kingdom come. He'll only get a 'pass' from me when Bad Boys 3 rolls, and it turns out to be GOOD (which is more than MIB 3 will be). I wonder if I could eat a king prawn vindaloo curry and still get an AICN reviewer to suck out the contents of my throbbing bowels in exchange for a set visit and a nice little brown envelope through the mail. Now bite down...hard.

No way every reviewer here just happens to like a movie that only one in 3 critics at RT like. And the one of 3 at RT that gives it a pass are nameless hacks as easily bought as the people here obviously are now. I've always known Harry's opinion was rather worthless but now I can add all the other reviewers here to that list.
This site never gets any advanced news anymore and if the reviewers can no longer be trusted then I see very little reason for me to come here anymore.

it seems this movie hasn't corrected the things which pissed me off in T1. These reviews mention this movie contains many dopey, unfunny "comic relief" characters and situations. Even before I read a single review I noticed the running time for this was 2 1/2 hours which means there is surely 20-30 minutes of unnecessary bullshit to sit through. The 1st two movies were guilty of being overlong for no good reason. I was mixed on T1 for these reasons, what I did like in T1 was the well done & realistic CGI of the transformers and the action scenes. I have a feeling my criticisms & praises would be similar to T3 based on what has been written about it so far.

was OK, but not worth a second look.
I think I have seen 5 Bay movies in theatres:
The Rock
Armageddon
Pearl Harbour
Transformers
Transformers 2
And I have no doubt seen many of his music videos and commercials without knowing it.
I just don't like his stuff. Frenetic directing style aside, I don't think he tells a good story and I don't think Bay really has anything interesting to say. His characterizations rely heavily on racial stereotypes (the loud/mouthy black man. The sassy black woman with attitude. The nerdy intellectual Jew. The sexy looking, but dumb as lint, blonde etc etc). Even his female leads are not that erotic even though he has slutted them up because you never actually see anything other than the tight clothes. It is much easier to do a Google search, with the safe search off, if you want to beat off to that particular starlet's tits.
I have no doubt that the visuals in part 3 will surpass the previous two films, but when you are spending in the neighbourhood of $200 million, I should hope that money has been put somewhere (and it certainly is not spent on the script, story or characters... although I am sure the actors' salaries are something to behold).
And it's not even about "Fuck you Michael Bay, you are not getting my $15..." It's only $15. But I'd just rather spend my time on something else.
Add to all of this that whenever I see Bay interviewed, he comes off as a relentless douche, which makes me want to see his upcoming films even less.

A friend who loved Transformers and who loves the first movie and even "didn't mind" the second has just told me that this one is all over the place, with even MORE stupid comedy and incoherent story telling and it's far cheesier than the 2nd film. Without the last 40mins he thought it would have been the worst of the lot. He loved the 3d and loved some parts of it but absolutely hated others. (And dont forget he enjoyed the previous 2).
I'm just waiting for someone to edit all 3 movies into about an hour or so of a new Robot Jox for me cheers.

it seems this movie hasn't corrected the things which pissed me off in T1. These reviews mention this movie contains many dopey, unfunny "comic relief" characters and situations. Even before I read a single review I noticed the running time for this was 2 1/2 hours which means there is surely 20-30 minutes of unnecessary bullshit to sit through. The 1st two movies were guilty of being overlong for no good reason. I was mixed on T1 for these reasons, what I did like in T1 was the well done & realistic CGI of the transformers and the action scenes. Based on what I've read from some of the reviews so far, T3 will be a frustrating mixed bag at best.

There's no way I'm going to believe it's good after the mediocre first one and the horrible second one. I can't believe all of the critics on here have liked it. Of course Harry did, since he loves shit like this, but Massa? Come on man.

This site has ZERO integrity. This is the same garbage. Saying it's better than the second, and that the last 30 mins is great doesn't mean the rest of the movie isn't a steaming pile of shit. It still has the ignorant parents. It still has the retarded sector 7 retard. It's still Michael Bay. All the explosions in the world wouldn't save this film, or any other Bay movie.

Where did I throw an ad hominem attack your way?
I certainly did not intend to. All I put forth was that movie geeks are not solely concerned with the topics you listed. I thought a movie geek was just someone who loved movies, knew a lot about movies, and watched a ton of movies, but that doesn't mean they all have to value the same things in them.

None of the other reviewers got the tone or balance right at all considering they were half-openly trying to sell a turd as a piece of gilded artwork.
And Crapone wonders why everyone thinks he's a two-faced moronic c*nt....

Just leave out the motherfucking pot brownies, the idiotic parents altogether, have a little comic relief consisting of SCENE- AND TONE-APPROPRIATE JOKES ETC., but get rid of the dumb whores who can't act and find someone halfway attractive who can (PERSONALITY IS ATTRACTIVE TOO, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE GIRL IS GOOD LOOKING TO BEGIN WITH -- SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A SOULLESS GUTTER WHORE YOU PICKED FOR BEING 'SLIGHTLY HOTTER')...
Leave out Sam saying "nonononono" and "optimussssssss!" over and over
Make the autobots the main characters
Is there anything I'm forgetting?
WHY THE HOLY BITCH TITTED FUCK IS THIS MOVIE TWO HOURS AND FORTY MINUTES LONG??? THAT'S FUCKING RETARDED.
Cut out all the dumb fucking shit and it will be a perfect 100-minute popcorn movie. Goddamn it infuriates me that Bay gets away with including so much rancid degradation and bullshit in his movies when he's really being paid to promote a children's toy ... presumably to children. What place do Megan Fox's hairy love cave and mothers high on marijuana have in a movie for kids??

Here in Chicago, Ebert: one star and Michael Phillips: one and a half stars. I think I'll trust the real critics on this one. I hate when people say stupid shit like who cares if there is no plot or character development, it's NON-STOP ACTION! Whoopeee! I might've thought like that when I was twelve, not anymore. It is possible to make an exciting action film that also has a sense of storytelling and characters that an audience might actually give a shit about. Do you just want to see your names in the ads?
"The Third time is the charm!"
-Harry Knowles

I had a long post I had written disappear during a debate earlier this week. At first, I thought everyone's complaint about this problem was just their mistake: sometimes when you hit "POST", you think it goes through but it really doesn't. Your text remains but you move on.
Anyhoo, turns out AICN really DOES have a big issue with these posts disappearing, and its aggravating as hell.
But my point was that movie geeks don't *have* to value all the same thing. Many geeks do value well-directed action sequences as well as character studies. Not all of us are the same, nor does there need to be a standard definition of "movie geek" that we need to adhere to when it comes to likes and values.

With forgettable sans formidable villains, greatness for this movie is doomed...oh and Nice Gaius is right...buncha talkbackers running around with fried circuit boards..."DOES NOT COMPUTE! DOES NOT COMPUTE! DOES NOT COMPUTE!>>>>>". LOL.

From Season 2 of Beast Wars Transformers, circa 1997.
Featuring the most tragic moment of sacrifice in the history of the franchise.
Told via mid-90s pixels and voice acting. Story is stronger than the medium that tells it.
Massa's exuberance shouldn't over-shadow true art with the drug of spectacle.

Given the choice between sitting through 154 minutes of Transformers: Dark of the Moon and being waterboarded, I plead: Waterboard me!
June 28, 2011
James Verniere
Boston Herald
LMAO! Funniest review so far on RT.

They are both the same thing to me. If we want to make a distinction between a film geek who can appreciate all kinds of movies and a film geek who only likes the good stuff, maybe we should say something like "Good Movie Lover".
"Film Lover" implies the other, a movie geek, can't love film too, and that's simply not true. Its an elitist attitude to have, and its not right to suggest that bc one person enjoys dumb movies, he can't also love and enjoy the good stuff too.
I think people like to say things like that because they don't want to imagine its possible for someone to like the same great movies they do, but also like the bad movies they hate.

The reviews are being dumbed down on this site, thus I can completely understand the comments re how much has Paramount paid.
For this movie they seem to be using the Bayscale for judging the movie and excusing of all its defeciences.
So on the Bayscale its an 8 out 10 ? but compared to other movies a 5(maybe 6) out of 10 ?
What we already knew is that Bay could make a movie about blowing things up, and he has seemingly excelled at this, so it sounds like I should see this movie, but I should only see the last hour of this movie, like a rollercoaster ride or watching a fireworks display.
Question for everyone was the focus of these movies about the human characters and not the transformers, because a) the producers didn’t think the audience could connect with the robots (i.e. they have never seen a Pixar movie), b) it’s a Bay movie so it was never a chance, as it requires some level of characterization, c) both or d) something else ?

Ain't It Cool News has redeemed itself! All positive reviews to the biggest hit this summer. Fuck off to everyone here and all the reviewers who hated this movie. You can give an Academy Award to a chick that turned into Big Bird, but you shit on Optimus Prime? Like Bumblebee in TF1, this thing will piss all over XMen, Captain America, Thor, Green Lantern, Cars 2, and all of the other "competition" that arrived this summer. Michael Bay rules Hollywood and I can't wait to see Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's gorgeous ass in 3D! Damn you Michael Bay! You did it again!

A true lover of cinema does not have a painfully narrow definition of what constitutes 'worthy'.
A true lover of cinema can find something interesting in any piece of cinema, and is invested in doing that over marinating in the shit of things.
A true lover of cinema likes flavours; is honest; can enjoy something terrible and dislike something amazing.
Because a true lover of cinema loves cinema.
Most of the opinion on this site and in the 'geek' community in general comes from a place of hate. Petty, snarling, vicious hate.
And fuck that. I love movies because I love movies. I love all kinds of movies. I might love this for what it does accomplish -- and I won't hate it for or dwell on what it fails at -- unless it becomes too much to bear. And even then, if I focus on the stuff that's shit, it doesn't make me a smarter, better, faster film critic. It makes me a miserable prick who glories in failure instead of mourns it, and I will never be that man. Because I truly love cinema.

Its the episode I thought it was, after reading a summary online.
Stereotypical Evil Archer is right- it is a GREAT episode. Shocking to my teenage self when I watched it for the first time in the 90s. The sacrifice at the end even brought some tears to my eyes before I trudged off to school.

With the exception of disaster movies, which are lame to begin with, an action movie is nothing without an interesting or at least a scary antagonist. Die Hard, Indy, Star Wars, James Bond, even the dinos in Jurassic Park had a certain personality or at least menace.
Now I know this is hard to accomplish with CGI robots but in the hands of the right filmmakers, it might be possible. But if an FX and stunt reel is all they're going for then they should drop the human melodrama/comic relief bullshit or at least make it interesting.
I'm not expecting Jaws out of Michael Bay and I realize these are essentially kid's films but kids aren't as stupid as filmmakers seem to think. Well some are but not all.
I don't know what I'm bitching about, I'm trying to get into motion graphics myself so I should be cheering this kind of shit on.

Seriously you make me fucking laugh. I read the plot and it's fucking atrocious. I love the TBs and it's fun to watch the Bay apologists cling to any positive review declaring Bay beat Lex Luthor while other critics are panning this bastard net fucking wide.
I don't know what Bayers are so fucking worried about,... most want mindless crap when they have no vested interest in heart of the story other than it's fucking robots bashing each other. They got that lock stock and barrel.
Transformer3 for everyone else with a brain is in for basically a fucked up version of the Space Bridge finale from the G1 80's cartoon if a soap opera writer was fucking with his kid's toy collection while watching Office Space.
Seriously ? I'm glad I read the spoiler. I just saved myself 20.00 bucks, I'll catch all the mind blowing special effect on You tube when every fucktard puts up a AMV showcasing the best this movie has to offer set to Linkin Park or Rammestien songs next to the countless Bleach videos.

If 'true' lovers of cinema don't voice negative opinions, then it is cinema that suffers the slow and painful death on it's steady decline into mediocrity. To not voice said opinions publicly doesn't make someone a 'true lover of cinema', it only makes them a coward. A 'true lover of cinema', (as people are painfully attempting to label themselves as), Is passionate about cinema and is willing to voice their opinions, good or bad. Good, in hopes of persuading others to share in enjoyment, bad, to dissuade so as not to reward those who would degrade the art for profit from those who dont know any better (such as those who are deciding which movie to see for the first time in a theater). Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, whether others agree or not, but what you are saying is like telling someone you love a woman but are unwilling to defend her 'because you truly love her'. And that does not make sense.

Trust me, my tastes are as varied as anybody's. I love all kinds of movies that I know are horrible. But there are sort of two kinds of movie lovers. People who prefer more mainstream stuff and people who prefer something a little more challenging.
Maybe I'm just a cranky old bastard, but I work with a lot of self-described "movie geeks" that only enjoy stuff like this. If I mention something like There Will Be Blood, Mulholland Dr. or say I want to see The Tree of Life, they say it was "slow" or "boring".
All I was saying above was, if these are the types of films you prefer MOST... I guess what I really meant was you just have bad taste. Like if you read Danielle Steele and Robert Patterson, you have bad taste in literature.

Not everybody likes shit like Donnie Darko, Inception and Memento. I want to be fucking entertained!!! If I have to shut down my fucking brain to do it, god help me I will. Donnie Darko.... what a pile of shit that was.

...are the very reason why summer "blockbusters" are nothing but big, loud, dumb garbage these days. You keep going, so they keep making them. 20+ years ago the summer blockbuster was hardcore, R-rated, had a plot, and the actors tried to act. FUCK ALL OF YOU.

I discovered Beast Wars in college. My roommate at the time kept skipping half a class so he could watch it at 1pm Monday through Friday. He kept saying how great it was. The little bit of it I saw looked fucking stupid.
Boy was I fucking wrong!
The next semester I had that time open and I had no choice but to watch it since my roommate would have gone ape-shit (that's kind of a lame pun, unintended).
It just so happened that the series started again from the beginning. It took a few episodes that truly just felt like toy commercials and then...
I became a fan of an incredibly entertaining and cleverly written sci-fi saga! It just happened to be based on robots that turned into animals (wtf).
My roommate had some old Generation 1 Transformers shows on tape. They were fun, but ultimately silly. But somehow BEAST WARS KEPT the CONTINUITY of Generation 1.
I thought robots transforming into animals was a stupid idea, but damn, that series was really good. Despite it's meager CG beginnings.
Too bad those writers didn't write the Transformers movies.
Shhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiit (to quote Clay Davis) those writers should have written LOST; at least they could have ended that series in a proper way.

I'm really struck by the comment about criticism coming from a place of hate. I do think comments forums can get shouty, but I also think that there's an underlying optimism behind my feeling that Michael Bay should be prevented, preferably with bribes because violence is wrong, from making any more movies about things I like.
This optimism is based on the fact that I remember how awesome I thought the first (Tim Burton) Batman movie was when I was a kid. It was dark, scary, had great music, and is in retrospect not very good compared to the Christopher Nolan version. I remember seeing the first half of X-Men and Iron Man and the LOTR movies and seeing that Hollywood is getting better at this stuff. Specifically, what I mean is that there are *ideas* underlying superheroes and Transformers and even GI Joe, and that those ideas are why I think of those characters fondly, and why they deserve to be on screen.
The general problem facing genre films is the fear of those ideas. That's why Green Lantern decided to be about daddy issues for no good reason, and why Phoenix got nerfed in X3. I also think it's why Star Wars 1-3 were so awful, but that's a whole different conversation.
Michael Bay only really has one idea, which is that we live in a world of one-dimensional stereotypes where it is very important for tough guys to kill everyone who is bad and date hot women. I kind of liked that idea in "The Rock", but that's not really what Transformers is about, so unless he's going to tell a new story I wish he'd keep his hands off of the property.
So the silly idea is, I only have my money and my voice as a way to advocate for quality versions of genre films, which cost millions to make and therefore don't happen too often. So with my money, I think it's important not to pay to see any movie that isn't doing anything worthwhile with the source material, and with my "voice" I'm gonna say that I don't think soulless 60-minute shaky-cam action sequences count as doing something worthwhile. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, of course, but the fact remains that paying to see a Bay film just means it's that much longer before there's a Transformers movie that can be enjoyed rather than consumed.

Read a spoiler-filled synopsis online and if you like it without the special effects, then you can call it a good movie. Wait, what am I saying? MB fans don't read. Silly me, nevermind, go back to licking 9v batteries or whatever you people do for fun.

I want explosions without the idiotic one liners and "comedy" scenes. I never even saw Tranny 2 because of them... but I love me my destruction. Sadly to find a non-lobotomizing destruction movie is hard.
But I have easy standards. My problems with 2012 were first and foremost because of the uneven effects and the terrible third act, otherwise I enjoyed it.
And I'll probably see Tranny 3... in theatres, too. And still I never plan to watch #2.

You all are awesome individuals. Beast Wars was not only a great Transformers cartoon, it was one of the best cartoons of the 90s for me.
Anyway, I personally can't wait for the MovieBob review of TF3.

My problem with Bay is that he has a limited set of ideas and techniques. I think there's a genuine audience for the Michael Bay Experience, and I have no problem with those people getting their fix...heck, I might even go myself. But when he makes "Transformers" movies he prevents other people from making movies about the Transformers, because he's still making movies about Michael Bay's Fantasy World of Testosterone. And that's a shame, because I'd like to see a Transformers movie someday.
Your argument about frustrated film students and stuff was petty and illogical. The crux of it seems to be that unless I agree that Michael Bay is some kind of rebel genius I'm a "sheep" and a conformist and also a frustrated artist. I don't think any of that follows from the fact that I believe Bay doesn't have a lot of range and tends to put the same tropes in every one of his movies. I don't think it's worth the effort of counting the number of times people run in slow motion on aircraft carriers in his movies, etc., but I'm pretty sure I could back up my assertions with evidence if I had to. But the thing is, I'm really not arguing that you're not allowed to like his movies. I just don't think he's self-aware enough to make a Transformers movie with actual Transformers in it, and that's disappointing as a fan.

My problem with Bay is that he has a limited set of ideas and techniques. I think there's a genuine audience for the Michael Bay Experience, and I have no problem with those people getting their fix...heck, I might even go myself. But when he makes "Transformers" movies he prevents other people from making movies about the Transformers, because he's still making movies about Michael Bay's Fantasy World of Testosterone. And that's a shame, because I'd like to see a Transformers movie someday.
Your argument about frustrated film students and stuff was petty and illogical. The crux of it seems to be that unless I agree that Michael Bay is some kind of rebel genius I'm a "sheep" and a conformist and also a frustrated artist. I don't think any of that follows from the fact that I believe Bay doesn't have a lot of range and tends to put the same tropes in every one of his movies. I don't think it's worth the effort of counting the number of times people run in slow motion on aircraft carriers in his movies, etc., but I'm pretty sure I could back up my assertions with evidence if I had to. But the thing is, I'm really not arguing that you're not allowed to like his movies. I just don't think he's self-aware enough to make a Transformers movie with actual Transformers in it, and that's disappointing as a fan.

My problem with Bay is that he has a limited set of ideas and techniques. I think there's a genuine audience for the Michael Bay Experience, and I have no problem with those people getting their fix...heck, I might even go myself. But when he makes "Transformers" movies he prevents other people from making movies about the Transformers, because he's still making movies about Michael Bay's Fantasy World of Testosterone. And that's a shame, because I'd like to see a Transformers movie someday.
Your argument about frustrated film students and stuff was petty and illogical. The crux of it seems to be that unless I agree that Michael Bay is some kind of rebel genius I'm a "sheep" and a conformist and also a frustrated artist. I don't think any of that follows from the fact that I believe Bay doesn't have a lot of range and tends to put the same tropes in every one of his movies. I don't think it's worth the effort of counting the number of times people run in slow motion on aircraft carriers in his movies, etc., but I'm pretty sure I could back up my assertions with evidence if I had to. But the thing is, I'm really not arguing that you're not allowed to like his movies. I just don't think he's self-aware enough to make a Transformers movie with actual Transformers in it, and that's disappointing as a fan.

Fuckin guy is a terrible terrible storyteller. He despises character, he cannot derive one honest emotion, but insists on trying in his own psychotic way. I think he actually hates "filmmakers" deep down, like those people that made 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, CITIZEN KANE and THE GODFATHER are the true phonies of the craft. And yet he has mastered his asshole approach to movies, finally.
DARK OF THE MOON is a retarded collection of robots, meat puppets and overacting. Rosie the Fembot is a piece of ass- a prop that will corrupt you and make you think that all women need to look like this and speak like Marlee Matlin. Plot? There's no fucking plot! It's eye porn- disposable, boner-inciting, hot, sexy and corrupt.
This is the anti-film- the one that George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Ridley Scott and so many other "greats" are too afraid to make. There's not one sentimental string in this gorgeous face-fucking. This is the movie Bay was destined to make- the one he has been inching towards, despite a studio system holding him back. He has perfected the modern, failed approach to cinema. He went all the way- fuck you, Martin Campbell; GREEN LANTERN is a limp-wristed attempt at jaying off to a JC Penny brassiere ad. Eat my shit, John Favreau-- without Robert Downey, Jr. your IRON MAN movies are uninspired, CG-laden versions of a cereal box. Take a flying leap, Sam Raimi-- your chick-flick approach to SPIDER-MAN is a weak attempt at genuine storytelling. Roland Emmerich... kill yourself now.
Bay has set out to seize the CGI era of movies by discarding all... fucking... conventions of what is generally regarded as respectable filmmaking.
This is a movie that needs to be seen only once, because repeat viewing will only reveal further its many flaws. This is a $3,000/night hooker who knows how to get you off and knows when to leave when it's all over.
I'll be dealing with my self-hate for a few days, that part of me that says "Don't fucking fall for this shit, you know these TRANSFORMERS movies were a lost opportunity." But let's be clear, the first movie was a diverting mess, the second one was like stepping in dog shit every single day for a week, but this third film is a streamlined, unapologetic aggressive tit-fuck. It's wrong, it's something you never want your kids or parents to know you enjoy, but it's honest about its intentions and doesn't care anymore about trying to be something better.
This is a movie about robots ripping the Earth and each other into pieces. Can this spectacle be topped? Not likely. Acting? Fuck you. Writing? No thanks. Action? Yes, yes... many times over.
Optimus Prime is Bernie Goetz in this thing. Megatron is a crackhead without his pipe. Bumblebee is Bruce Lee from GAME OF DEATH. Sentinel Prime is... probably the worst part of the robots in this movie. I won't spoil anything, but just don't fucking think about him too much. Buzz Aldrin showed up for this. Nixon, Kennedy, Obama... they all got a piece of this cinematic ass. This movie is a perfect Mike Bay movie. It does what no other post-JURASSIC PARK movie has managed- it took the CGI technique and burned your house down with it, with your cats and family still inside. And it made you smile at the disaster.
Fuck you, Mike Bay. Well fucking done.

It's entitlement.
Keep his hands off *the* property reads as keep his hands off MY property.
And that's fair, it really is.
Michael Bay does blow up stuff good. I respond to that. It's a gut thing. It gets me. I can watch terrible films with good effects and come away none the worse for it, because the terrible bits aren't worth dwelling on. They are terrible -- full stop.
The entirety of TRANSFORMERS 2 is full stop garbage. I felt lessened after it, because it was heavy with crap. But the first had moments (honestly, they felt like Spielberg set-visits) that were lighter than all the racist, sexist, scatological, machismo crap.
Neither were what I wanted in a TRANSFORMERS film. But it wasn't my film -- it was Michael Bay's. Everyone thinks that box office matters, but it only matters to the studios. What really matters in film are things that last. And only good things last -- or bad things last for good reason. TRANSFORMERS is short term. TWILIGHT is short term. Their effect on the course of film did not stop WINTER'S BONE from being made. Terrance Mallick released TREE OF LIFE in the shadow of FAST FIVE, PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN 4 and THOR.
Film survives, because it is an art, and art will out.
I appreciate when people are invested in film to the point they are eager to argue with strangers on the web with passion and conviction. But here, here especially, the dialogue exists between the few people willing, eager, to have it, while the margins fill up with hyperbolic nonsense on both sides.
Your money is your own -- so's your voice. Vote. Expressing disappointment IS a demonstration of love for film, and a powerful one. But the idea that the financial success of TRANSFORMERS will guarantee that thoughtful (DISTRICT 9, THE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, MOON, SOURCE CODE, NEVER LET ME GO) genre fiction will dry up is ludicris. IT HAS THE EXACT OPPOSITE EFFECT.
In a pre-TRANSFORMERS world, do you think anyone would have taken a gamble on DISTRICT 9? It's set in Africa, for fuck's sake. But I can't believe for a second there wasn't someone behind the button who heard the pitch and saw the concept art and thought, That sort of looks like TRANSFORMERS a bit, and that made money, so this is worth a shot. Of course it takes people of true vision to make that happen -- but films like these make room for those people to find their way through.
Michael Bay's narrative failures are his alone. Massa theorizes that Bay has a secret R cut of DARK OF THE MOON with all the shit -- and it's clearly, clearly shit, but maybe mildly amusing or eye-rollingly tolerable -- cut out. I hope so. I hope so because it means he's very cynically aiming for the cheap seats -- and maybe there's hope for him. But I don't need to dwell on his failures as a filmmaker. His successes are more interesting.
I always want films to be the best films they can be. I am frequently disappointed that they're not. But increasingly I find it hard to tolerate all the smug cynicism in this community.
Would it be better if all the jokes landed AND the story was genuinely compelling AND the characters were emotionally resonant AND it had an hour of Giant Fucking Robots smashing the shit out of a city and each other in 3D?
DO YOU EVEN HAVE TO ASK?!
Of course it would. And I also don't think Michael Bay is the man to bring us there. He might get 2/4 if lucky on his best day. But the 1 he's guaranteed -- his one note -- he plays well enough that I think it's worth a witness.
Pay for what you want to see -- but don't delude yourself into thinking you're making a statement other than what is meaningful to you.
Speak your mind -- but don't believe that snark and vitriol will move anyone to anything other than more snark and vitriol. Don't see disdain as the measure of taste.
You are entitled.
But none of us are owed.

My problem with Bay is that he has a limited set of ideas and techniques. I think there's a genuine audience for the Michael Bay Experience, and I have no problem with those people getting their fix...heck, I might even go myself. But when he makes "Transformers" movies he prevents other people from making movies about the Transformers, because he's still making movies about Michael Bay's Fantasy World of Testosterone. And that's a shame, because I'd like to see a Transformers movie someday.
Your argument about frustrated film students and stuff was petty and illogical. The crux of it seems to be that unless I agree that Michael Bay is some kind of rebel genius I'm a "sheep" and a conformist and also a frustrated artist. I don't think any of that follows from the fact that I believe Bay doesn't have a lot of range and tends to put the same tropes in every one of his movies. I don't think it's worth the effort of counting the number of times people run in slow motion on aircraft carriers in his movies, etc., but I'm pretty sure I could back up my assertions with evidence if I had to. But the thing is, I'm really not arguing that you're not allowed to like his movies. I just don't think he's self-aware enough to make a Transformers movie with actual Transformers in it, and that's disappointing as a fan.

Where the fuck have you people been for the past 10 fucking years? This guy has made a small career out of being a gormandizer of lowest common denominator garbage and loving it. Thats what he DOES, it's his THING. Those of you saying "Well I expected a bit more..." must be completely ignorant to his style, which is "idiot frat boy Ben Lyons-esque" love of objectively terrible nonsense. He didn't like the second one? Not surprising, not enough action for him. It has literally nothing to do with a discerning sensibility. He likes shiny rocks and NOTHING more than shiny rocks, that simple. And if this clowns review, which consists of "Lot's of shit blows up real good" and barely talks about anything else in the film, convinces you to see it, don't fucking sit there and pretend like you weren't already on board, because this is about a predetermined an opinion as film reviews get, so quit the highbrow posturing you poseur.

...2012 wholesale wiped all of California from existence in about a minute and a half...and promptly proceeded to do the same thing to the rest of the world after that.
Not saying it was a good movie, just saying though.

But he's a douche. Go waste your money and find out why. You're going to anyways.
Did I giggle? Well not really, I think I was grinding my teeth because I was so pissed off how Bay took Spockbot who was a hero in the original series and just completely threw that under the bus.
Scholck value I guess was the final reasoning on that call from the writer.
You'll be fine I didn't ruin shit, since you can't really ruin a plot point you'll forget in three hours after you leave the theater except for the really really big explosions and Chicago got flattened.

Sentinel Prime was in the Comic Books and the DOTM looks to be based off of Alpha Trion from G1 only renamed for what I surmise is the same stupid reason Bay had to name the Tank reject in the first movie Devastator.
Clearly a softball fuck you to fan boys conveying the I know better attitude on Bay's part, where he wanted to tap into the larger majority of Maxim masturbators.

Well believe them for me. It may well be a good flick for a 14 year old or some other ADD affected people. The first movie gave me a headache. The second a migraine. I wont dare risk nausea with the third one.
I dunno this year seems another weak one on the summer flick front. Save maybe Potter for closure.

I just saw the movie and it was TERRRRRRRIBLE. I didn't like the first one upon release but I've come to appreciate it as stupid fun (a la the first National Treasure movie). Also, I couldn't help but succumb to the overbearing ridiculousness of Revenge Of The Fallen. Despite popular opinion, I found it's stupidity/overall inanity sort of endearing.
But Dark Of The Moon doesn't work on ANY level, whatsoever. It reverses course from the previous two movies in a jarring way, turning away from "fun and irreverent toy-based robot movie" to "totally serious, it's really cool to be dark now and any humor we do incorporate can't work at all because we're so serious, apocalyptic toy-based robot movie."
The movie makes less sense than either of the other two (I didn't know that was possible), mostly because of the Decepticon's nonsensical plan to overtake planet earth and enslave 6 billion people, but they'll start in Chicago (lol), which in the end (spoiler that anyone over the age of 2 can see coming a mile away) they can't pull off anyway.
Worst of all, the 3D is the same bargain basement shit that studios have been throwing at us the past few years. It adds nothing to the experience, and ends up being quite distracting and exhausting.
But any movie that misuses John Malkovich to this degree should be automatically discounted to begin with. Frances McDormand is a bright spot, but she isn't given much to work with.
Unless you are a mega Transformers fan, skip it. It's Battle: Los Angeles with a bigger budget and a slightly more articulate screenplay. Anyone that loves it was clearly never going to do anything but love it. I couldn't believe that a few people clapped at the end of my screening. Astounding.

He said "Death Race", a movie that couldn't be more commercial and lame if it starred Matthew McConoughey and Kate Hudson, the best kind of exploitation film. The guy is a complete jackass. Again, he's the Ben Lyons of aint it cool, he has zero business reviewing film.

The real question is, why should Michael Bay get away with making terrible stupid dumbed down movies at all? Why excuse it all with just "it's a Michael Bay movie, what do you expect" nonsense? Why shouldn't Michael Bay be scrutinized with the same standards as aplied to all other directors? Why Michael Bay is allowed to get away with shit that it's intolerable in other filmmakers?
Well, my answer is, he shouldn't. And he isn't by me. That's why he's a shit. And that's why any appologetic review and opinions about Bay's crap movies either reek of imbecillity or corruption.

The nicest thing to say about this movie is that it's not as boring as the last. How the fuck do you make a boring Transformers movie? And how the fuck do you do it when you are Michael Bay?!
The ONLY good thing in this movie was Shia.

Indee fyou are very mistaken. I wonder where this myth that Massa is AICN's best writer cames from. Who says this things, 16 years olds? I know a person, an american guy, who completly stop going in here specifically because of Massa's reviews. Everytime he read one of his, he wanted to murder somebody, so he stoped. This was 2 years ago. He hasn't returned since.

Seriously fun, epic, joyous summer action. See it in 3D. It's mindblowing to watch. Funny where it's meant to be. OK, lacking in deep character writing and the Autobots and Decepticons live out their shiny roles as big stompy robot antagonists rather than giving us true grit and development, but the whole thing works. The plot moves along at a brisk pace and remains interesting throughout to see where it'll take you and it's eye-bleedingly gorgeous.
After all, it's a big roller-coaster ride - and what's wrong with that? Nothing.
Also, I can say Rosie Huntington-Whitely has been unfairly criticised. She's pretty much as empty a vessel as Megan Fox was, only with added sweetness and character the latter doesn't have. What're you expecting, Shakespeare quality acting? Pshaw!
Also suprising to see a decent human baddie, and the references to Star Trek are very nicely done. Bo!

Yeah, most of the annoying crap is gone, the acting and story are the usual MB fare, but damn if there isn't death destruction and bots tearing a city apart!
It's just like I've wanted it to be! It's summer popcorn movie at it's peak! An yes, I grew up watching the original cartoons. And hated the second movie.
So, it isn't perfect, but it was just what I was expecting. Plus the 3D wasn't sickening in a good OR ba way. I thought it was tasteful and really well done.

Instead of being film fans, most of you sound like jaded children spoiled by the anonymity of the Internet. I come here to read reviews and woul like to participate in real discussions. I wish you hate-boys would just start your own site. Maybe "ihateeverythingbutmyopinion.com" is taken.

But as of the subject of crawling out of asses, consider this: If i have to crawl out of an ass, i rather it be my own, instead of Michael Bay's. You know what i mean?
And by the way, Capone ripped the hell out of the type of review you did above in defens eof BAYSHITFUCKMERS 3, you know? Read his review for GREEN LANTERN, where he bashed the hell out of the type of argumentation you used to defend Bay's latest. What do you have to say on the matter?

"Michael Bay's "Transformers: Dark of the Moon" is a visually ugly film with an incoherent plot, wooden characters and inane dialog. It provided me with one of the more unpleasant experiences I've had at the movies."

I've been reading your comments. Relax my man. I mean what's the point? Everyone here knows you have a hard on for Transformers Kool-Aid. You were predisposed to like this garbage from the beginning. In reality it's just another messy Transformers film. Once the hype of seeing it wears off. You'll come to your senses.

At 4:20am this is far and away the funniest work of wordsmithery I've ever read, Asimov. Almost woke up the wife I laughed so hard.
As for the film in question? I'll still see the matinee on Thursday. Sometimes I want a deep story and involved character development. And sometimes I just want to see shit blow up or watch the body count rise. I think this will sate one of those needs on an early Thursday afternoon.

No, it was Bay who sold a bridge to you. And you bought it wholesome. If you think some filmmaker is isempt from such things in commercial movies, then what the hell are you doing reviewing movies? Is Mickey Bay making some low-budget cheap art-house film student movies? Is Bay deliberatly making art-house movies for a very selected audience? No, he is, isn't he? Then how the hell can you excuse him for being incompetent at doing something that the vast majority of filmmakers can do competently? How can you excuse yourself on that?
You are a professional reviewer. no matter how you chose to call yourself, you are a professional published reviewer. You have to have standards. You have to have a guideline. you can't go critcising some other dumb movies and calling them on that and then suddently on one another you go all appologetic about it. You can't criticise one movie for the very things that you will praise another. You have to have consistency. Or else you might be subjected to criticism yourself. Thew watchers are watched indeed.

ROCKING YOUR BALLS OF SUMMER 2011
OH YEAH ASSCOCKNBALLSLIVES NO ONE CAN HEAR YOU SCREAMING THEY'RE ALL INSIDE WITNESSING THE BIGGEST IMAX 3D MASTERPIECE OF ALL FUCKING TIME
OPTIMUS SAYS FUCK YOU YOURE JUST JEALOUS MY MOVIE IS THE HOT SHIT BABY

That review is more entertaining than most movies (I'm sure it is more entertaining than TRANSFORMERS 3). Everyone here can shut up and move on because that review is the beginning and end of any debate.
Good job sir.

You attempted to ride some faint praise line, but don't try to sell me that the whole "This is a film your mom is really gonna love" isn't code for "Im apologizing for enjoying this." And no, I'm not at all inventing that logic for the sake of argument, I would bet money that was the impetus whether it was subconscious or not. Everything in your film reviewing lexicon belies that is the case.

And you can understand what he is getting at.
Correct me if I am wrong but you guys don't give stars or out of 10, Moriarty gives a rating in his new gig (gave it a B+ I believe), what I want to know is it that you have a different scale for different kinds of movies, thus its an 8/9 out of 10 of things being destroyed movies, but would struggle to be a 5

I DIDN'T like Wild Hogs. At all. But I said middle America would love it - and specifically that my mother would. And I was right. It was a monster hit. My mother loved it and I would never watch it again. I even said as much. With reading comprehension like yours, it's a wonder the only reason anyone knows you exist is because you spam talkback.

I absolutly loved the film. It is the best of the three. There isnt the annoying twins. There are no stupid dogs. The parents scenes are suttle and I actually laughed at one or two of the lines they had. Rosie I absolutly fancy the fuck out of now and wasnt sure before i saw the film. Turettos role as a kind of expert I thought was brilliant. I even liked the guy who did the dirty on Sam and Carly. But the stand out for me is the 3D and Bays action set ups. Some of the shit he pulled of visually wise is nothing short of amazing. I'm so happy Bays finally given me the Transformers fillm i've been waiting for. I wanna go on about some of the 3D sequences but I'll wait for a spoiler talkback.

Like I have no point in taking you task. I seriously have to sit here and point out how you gloss over EVERYTHING IN THE FUCKING FILM except for the action under the sick logic that "eh, it's Michael Bay"? Fuck you dude, that's not a film review, that's you sitting around chatting with some idiot stoner friends. How about you actually take the time to explore or make some kind of case why, despite not working on literally any other level, Transformers get's to skate by on imagery, imagery largely recycled but just more expensive looking. I don't think you can without being a complete apologist about it. So take your licks and like it.

The reason I pay little attention to you and IK is that your argument hinges upon the fact that you see film as an objective, rather than a subjective, medium. I'm sure if I back you into a corner you'll deny it, but your arguments always hinge upon "He liked Star Trek, thus his review is worthless." IK loves to dig through old reviews and find unpopular films that I liked and cites that as some sort of evidence. The idea that I can enjoy spectacle for the sake of spectacle and art for the sake of art is foreign to you both. I do have standards - and the standard I set over ten years ago was that I would watch a film for what it aspired to be rather than what I wished it was. But I also take care to write my reviews for the people that disagree with me as much as those who agree with me. No one should read that above review and have any doubt as to whether or not they should see this movie. You're either onboard for the fun hollow spectacle or you are not. That's the second concept you guys seem to have a problem wrapping your mind around - this job isn't about taste, it's about engaging the audience and helping them make their minds up for themselves. I threw as many elbows here as I did lump praise - but at the end of the day, I cannot lie about whether or not I enjoyed myself. I did. I REALLY enjoyed myself.
Frankly, it blows my mind that you two even bother to read my reviews anymore, hate them as you do. I think you guys just like being angry and this is what you use for rage porn. It's hard to take people like that seriously.

Optimus Prime, the fucking bad ass hero of the movie spends half, literally half, of the climatic hour hanging upside down stuck in telephone or construction wires of some kind, not even like some super advanced net wire or something excusable, but just hanging upside down like a fucking asshole. He has to get cut down by a couple of other Autobots.
How the FUCK can you call this movie cool when they treat the fucking hero like a total douche?
If Batman or Iron Man or 007 spent half of the fucking climax of a movie hanging upside down caught in fucking wire would you say that was a cool or fun movie?!
I am just astounded by how retarded this movie was. I admit it is better than the last but not better than the first and still boring as hell for most of it. The action scenes would have been awesome if I hadn't seen them in a trailer that had more of an action pace than the fucking movie did.
I am one generously forgiving mother fucker when it comes to judging movies. But Michael Bay didn't make a movie that even made sense from one scene to the fucking next. Every fucking scene seemed like it was written as a stand alone moment. The fucking movie felt like it was missing an hour of in between scenes. Not that it needs to be a fucking hour longer!

as you surmise in your last comment and int he review itself. Why review it? What fucking good is that? Because film criticism is an exploration of film and the place it holds in our lives. My problem isn't JUST that you like awful films, it's that you like awful films on the most base of levels. If you offered SOME kind of insight into movies as exclusively crass entertainment, like say Vern used to, you might get some kind of credit. You do not. You straight up assume that kind of thing is intrinsic and the crassness of it above all else is the thing that is to be most celebrated. To put it in laymens terms, for you, dumb seems to equal fun, "fun" in all it's vague nebulous corrupting glory. As if fun is the cause of it's own effect, like a snake eating itself. That's what you are the champion of above all else, which sort of makes you the champion of nothing.
You like other kinds of films? Perhaps, but it certainly doesn't show in your Massawyrm persona, which seems dedicated exclusively to piling genre entertainment into one giant bag of roman candles which all give off an almost identical iridescent glow. Also, you seem to have no desire for improvement in what just about every reasonable fan of film understands as a genre film landscape dying of crotch rot. Parodying itself endlessly as the films get dumber and dumber. I can't respect that lack of acknowledgement. You want to be optimistic that's fine, but you border on celebration. I'm not sure how anyone who claims to love the art form, and I mean great Schwarzenegger films as much as I mean Tree of Life, can possibly be so dispassionate about that aspect of it.

You people are crazy. And who ever was talking about Capone's review, he reviewed the movie first: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49648 . But he had a set visit, so according to you, he's been bought and paid for.

You could say all the Bayshitfuckmers movies (and all of Bay's movies) have a backbone story as well. And i would say they all have a terrible case of osteoporosis.
But the major problem is not so much the basis backstory of, say, this movie. The real problem is how it's told. and as in any Bay movie, it's told terribly. You could give Moby Dick for Bay to make and he would make a shit out of it. People long for Bay to make a moie out of a good script. But he wouldn't know what to do with it. Aparently, pearl harbor was that, a movie that had a good script as basis and Bay just fucked it all up into the movie we all know and hate.

you miss the whole fucking point of art and entertainment if you think you're supposed to dissect and score movies. you're supposed to experience them. if it's a bad experience then say so, but don't fucking talk about it like a fucking teacher grading an essay. critics do that because they make their living doing it. otherwise they wouldn't do it. if you don't make your living doing it then if you do it you are just a pretentious asshole missing the point of movies.

Simple fact is if you don't like his reviews, don't read them? It's all just opinion. You're just wasting your own time - he's not going to change his style, and an argument, however well written, on a message board certainly isn't going to change his mind. As far as I can see AICN doesn't claim to be a professional site, more a blog, and each reviewer has their own personality and viewpoint. It's fair enough.
It comes from the perspective of the inherent movie and geek (not necessarily the same thing) fanboy, which is why fanboys flock here. So I expect reviews of a borderline forum comments calibre, and they're usually entertaining and from a perspective I can understand. I don't expect concise, pointed commentary and criticism from here, I want to know if someone enjoyed the film or not.
Nobody should expect hard-bitten film journalism from AICN. That's missing the point of why it was founded and the intentions of who founded it.
Also, this is a comments board for a review of TF3 so you're a bit OT. It'd help to have some knowledge of having seen the film first. Which is as expected, Bayformers, but at least it's entertaining Bayformers, and not the horrid, reeking mess of Bayformers 2.
Is it dumb? Yes. Is it fun? Well, actually, yes it is. Is it a film of depth, of substance? No, it isn't. If you're expecting that you bought the wrong ticket. Is it astoundingly spectacular? Yes. The action direction this time out is amazing to watch. The plot and character exposition scenes are basic, but they work within the frame of the movie. It's a painting of an explosion.
In the world of Transformers, a constantly reinvented franchise of toys, it works. It doesn't have the depth of the comics. I can understand that disappointment, but both can exist within the same franchise. The cartoon universe of Transformers has a lot of reinvention and reinterpretation (good and bad), so Bayformers can exist in its own right without tainting what went before.
Even better Bay adknowledges the fact that the second was steaming shitpile of bollockry of the highest order and doesn't reference it one bit. TF3 is the true sequel to Transformers, for good or for bad. It won't convert you if you hated the first, but in terms of the magic of cinema, in creating the impossible out of light playing on the screen, it has every right to exist and be out there entertaining people. Which is basically what it was made for - no excuses.

If that's really how you feel, and I think it is only because you don't have the intellect to keep up and you're keenly aware of it, I pity the philosophically tiny headspace you obviously inhabit, devoid of all expansion of self.
I find it hilarious to think that A. O. Scott is one day going to hand in his resignation to the times, breathe a sigh of relief, then pull out all his unopened Kevin James DVD's and just laugh and laugh for hours on end. And even with your logic, Massa is a payed critic, so I guess he should be doing that whole "teacher grading" thing once in a while.

I thought it was told just fine. Everything was explained. All the characters had there own pieces. A simple story simply told. But I respect your opinion man and concede there is no turning you on the movie because from what it sounds 3D action and explosions aint your bag. Cannot wait to hear what the choppah thinks of it.

I come to this site because they don't review like the average douche bag on some random website or the a wanna be know it all film critic who has invested little to no time with the source material this site focuses on. Stop being a snobby cunt because he didn't type what you wanted him to type. If you want everyone to hate the movie, maybe you should publish your <critiques> on your own website. That way everyone can tell you how terrible your taste is.

Nothing you explain in your mini review, or in the previous films, qualifies as fun unless you completely shut off your brain. I'm not capable of that because I have a sense of taste. What you don't do is make a qualified argument why something that insanely lacking in quality in again, EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT except for one, and it's one that's been done ad nauseum just to different levels of expense, is a defensible thing. And moreover, why should I have to except such shoddy craftsmanship? You and I,a s consumers and cinephiles, NEED to ask for more.

It is fun. I had fun with it. What's wrong with that? Did I need to "shut my brain down"? No. In fact my brain caused havoc watching First Class, because I was constantly questioning the poor logic of the storytelling in that movie. I wanted to let go of the poor plotting and characterisation in favour of what it did right (which was a lot), but instead it was hoisted on its own petard by straddling two worlds.
TF3 is unabashedly there simply to entertain, in the simplest terms. Cinema is, after all, a medium to entertain as well as teach, pull at the heartstrings and make you think. Sometimes all. The sheer balls of Transformers 3, in the blistering action scenes, can take your breath away, and it has every right to exist.
It has a quality. Whether you like what it contains is entirely down to your taste, and your taste alone. But I cannot equivocally criticise it for being what it's not, and nobody should do that of any film.
Other films exist that do more. I've recently enjoyed a film diet that included Uncle Boonmee, Breathless and Midnight In Paris. I don't need to ask for more from TF3 because I got what I asked for. As I got what I asked for from the previous films. What does disappoint is when you don't get what you asked for (for example, much as I love Monsters, the marketing really didn't do much for that film).
As you have every right to criticise it once you've seen it. But you can make that judgement call yourself, it's not for everyone, and nobody is forcing you to buy a ticket.

Everyone's different.
Another thing - people want and see these films. They make their money back by the thousands, and that feeds into sequels and other movies. I'm not going to berate it for being a runaway success. Anything that keeps cinema going and investing in visions, regardless of whether I like them or not, is good for me as a fan of the medium.
After all, the digital age is paving the way for new filmmakers who do things that Bay doesn't. There's plenty of examples of brain-nourishing cinema coming from the bigger companies feeding into their indie outlets. And even better, people picking things up made at an indie level to a high standard and distributing them.
But I digress... and had better get back to work.

him and Optimus are at a beach party in the Carribean drinking top shelf margaritas, deciding which hot babe they are gonna bang tonight.
This is why you are jealous Assimov. Chris Nolan is sitting in his den reading a book. He doesn't know how to party like Michael Bay. Plus, after people see Transformers 3, they will forget ALL about that movie Inception.

I want every comic book movie to be spot on with the source material, and be an instant hit with everyone else. I want an Airbender movie that doesn't suck shit. I want the Star Wars prequels rebooted without Lucas' involvement. But being angry about shitty movies will get you nowhere.
As you've so eloquently stated in all your posts, all the retards are going to watch this. I don't know if you've noticed the last decade or so when it comes to what's popular in media, but there are a lot of retards. They will watch this movie. Hell, you're going to watch this movie. This movie is going to get its money. If you want good movies, you have to go watch them. The reason smart movies like Observe and Report get beaten out by Paul Blart, Mall Cop is because the smart people don't go see the smart film.
You should be yelling to the high heavens that your local theater isn't playing 13 Assassins on the biggest screen available, or there's only 3 showings of Tree of Life. Being a cunt because a Michael Bay movie might be decent does you no favors.
Also you guys should watch G1 Transformers again. That shit is terrible. I had the comics, had the shows copied on beta tape, cried when Optimus die. That shit is garbage. It's funny because Revenge of the Fallen is exactly what a modern G1 episode would be. Bullshit exposition, fights, bots get hurt, Optimus dies, like he does in every tv show arc, then comes back and kicks ass. Megatron even slinks away shaking his fist practically grumbling NEXT TIME PRIME.
TLDR: Stop being a whiny cunt over a movie.

As the same standards that apply to XMen: First Class apparently do not apply to Transformers 3. As the one and only reason you liked Transformers more comes down to expensive special effects. There is ZERO reason why this should be the case, and why it should be good enough for any of us.
As for you saying films like Transformers keep the industry going, you are technically right and spectacularly wrong about why that is a good thing. Films make money, as a whole. They go up, they go down, but they are NEVER not a viable entertainment, and they will never not get made, at least in our lifetime. Saying we need films like transformers to perpetuate the artform is the fucking height of absurdity, it's also a dangerous concept. Getting an original script sold in this town has become more and more difficult (and on the record I applaud Massawyrm for doing so, my ire does not extend to his personal life, I hope he does well for himself int hat realm) and that's for several reasons but one of them is people are just not turning out for original ideas. Moreover, they are turning out in droves for sequels and remakes. It's a HUGE problem. It's horrible for creative storytelling and quality in film. If you think by going to see something as cynical as Transfuckingformers 3 is good for the industry you are completely out of your fucking tree. You're certainly right about the digital age and indie film, but one has NOTHING to do with the other, and for every massively successful bullshit sequel like Transformers that does gangbusters at the BO, it's one more other film Paramount, who like most of the studios is cutting back on productions numbers, isn't going to make. So you are just dead wrong with that aspersion.

If you want to be taken seriosuly as a reviewer, you better take that as the way to go. Or as a reasonable movie geek as well. Otherwise you are just a mere enthusiast without standards. Ypou are just doing geekasms. And you can't hope to be taken seriously or respectfully that way. You better start thinking about that. And i know you crave for respectability. Of course you would. That's how it should. but you have to consider how to achieve that. And that will not be with mere geekasms. I know you are a religious person, so remmeber what Saint Paul wrote in Letter to the Corrinthians: "As i grew, i left childish things behind." It is one of the most beautiful passes in the whole of the bible, and it speaks to the very core of who we are. It also aplies to who you are and what you want to be as a professional published reviewer.
I know you will not agree with what i wrote. I bet you are even upset with what i wrote. Or you will completly dismiss it and give give a shit. Fair enough. But i might be more of a friend with what i wrote above then all the combined praises you will get. You should know why.

Some kinds of movies are made for one audience, and some are made for another. Pretty obvious, huh? While nothing says you can't like more than one kind of movie, it is ridiculous, at the same time, to assume that the same crowd that can't WAIT for FAST AND FURIOUS PART TEN will be beating down the doors for MIDNIGHT IN PARIS. That is why - surprise! - there ARE "chick flicks", action movies, courtroom dramas, "disease" movies, slasher movies, etc. Different flavors.
So what exactly are you proving - except that you are a tiresome clown - by ripping on someone who gives TRANSFORMERS 3 a good review because it is an entertaining two hours of solid action where GIANT ROBOTS THAT TURN INTO CARS AND PLANES BASH EACH OTHER AND BLOW STUFF UP?
There were parts of the second movie that I loathed, and that LOTS of folks loathed ...and Massa makes it clear that those were addressed. He is saying that judged on its own terms, it works... it is a fun (GASP!), action packed movie (YES I HAVE TO SAY IT AGAIN) WHERE GIANT ROBOTS THAT TURN INTO CARS AND PLANES BASH EACH OTHER AND BLOW STUFF UP.
If that isnt for you, if you want Optimus Prime having a long heart to heart with Stephen Hawking about the nature of life, artificial and organic, or a moving exploration of family life set against the backdrop of Earth's ongoing encounter with cybernetic lifeforms, guess what? YOU have the problem. Sorry, but that is it. This cartoon-derived movie isn't for you.
And if you can't appreciate someone having an enthusiasm for that kind of "Giant Robots fighting" movie...what ARE you doing reading REVIEWS OF A TRANSFORMERS MOVIE?
So tired of all the pretentious posing by the "above it all crowd" - which is, I know, a hallmark of this site... a bunch of talkbackers who are way too smart, way too sophisticated, way too worldweary and jaded for any of the movies talked about here (yeah, right), and for any of the reviewers who post here, who nonetheless KEEP COMING BACK HERE AND POSTING about how above it all you all are.
TRANSORMERS 1 was a lot of fun - about as good a job as you could do, translating a fun but hardly cerebral 80s cartoon into a big screen, mash 'em up, adventure. The second one had its moments but was a BIG step down from the first. From what Massa says, this one gets it right again, and maybe THEN some.
Deal with it.
Shadow

Movie critics are leaches tolerated as free press. Their opinions are bullshit. Wanna be critics like you are just plain pathetic.
I am a professional game designer. I have opinions about movies but they are tempered with respect or the hard work and courage required to make professional art or entertainment.
Critics are classist assholes, period. They are an insult to artists and crafts people. They are a relic. A shadow of the decadent bored spoiled elites of aristocractic times. Which is why I consider then leaches and why I have read AICN reviews since Titanic. AICN is the voice of film lovers. They not only talk about films from love but they provide this... a talk back... because they aren't elites they are appreciative lovers of movies.
Now, pull your head out of your wanna be elite asshole and sow some respect to your hosts.

I certainly am not "out of my tree". I know how the industry works and am privvy to it through my professional life.
Anyway, I can see this is going no-where. See it, don't see it. Nobody has to justify having "fun" with anything, be it a Michael Bay movie or having a great time ripping the shit out of Troll 2 or The Room.
I also know I've seen creative films like District 9 (off the top of my head) and others that aren't sequels that satisfy me, whilst not being AAA, as being qualitatively up there with the summer Hollywood uber-budget fair. So I don't see where the panic is coming from. If anything there's been a renaissance since digital has brought moviemaking to the masses and to claim that TF3 is hurting the industry when movies like Monsters are making money is a bit, well, factually incorrect.
But that's just your opinion, man.
Ultimately, I've seen TF3, so am qualified to talk about it, and know my personal reaction to it. It's certainly not the best film I've ever seen (I can say that about nearly every film I do watch), but it does what it does well, as advertised, and it's quite easy to know whether or not it's a film for you.

I will put my snobbery aside, and allow myself to have a good time during my summer break to catch this movie. I don't give a fuck right now about serious stuff really, because there is too much seriousness in the world right now anyway. Good ol' escapism folks...accompanied by popcorn and sodie...oh, and fuck whatever Ebert says, he didn't like Full Metal Jacket.

Transformers 3 was a huge big steaming piece of shit in a very thin layer of competent fan service and textbook action plotting.
Transformers 3 doesnt thrill you with action. It makes you forget that action can be smart and thrilling by hypnotizing you with CG patterns and one detached pan/dolly shot after another.
Transformers 3 is dangerous because it succeeds on the most superficial of levels, reducing its genre to a horrible doppelganger, whispering in your ear that its okay to have a privileged, cynically performed hero, obvious, disposable expository plotting and shoves beloved characters like puppets on strings to perform old routines without any of the energy or meaning that they once carried.
Transformers 3 degrades the action genre. It makes audiences lower their standards for what they will cheer for. It is a hollow, sexist, racist shit sandwich.
I would rather watch Revenge Of The Fallen any day of the week. I like my evil weak and obvious and exposed, not buried under the allusion of 'doing better'.
p.s I liked the first Transformers and The Rock is awesome.

First, you have glowing, beaming review for a movie that part of a franchise is a joke. Transformers......lips on Optimus Prime, flames of OP, DAMN YOU MICHAEL BAY, XPLOSIONS!!!!!!!!
And yet everyone at AICN is posting great reviews based on the point that "it is bread and circus" "well it is a Bay movie" Smells rotten to me.
So what if it's better than the first movie...I thought that one sucked...so I will not be seeing this. Even if it was free, with free popcorn.
Second, Asi and IK getting raked over the coals for their fanboy rage is great. I know that they are sitting at their computers right now writing witty posts to get more attention.
Opinions are like assholes, we all have one and it they usually stink. This goes for overly passionate Talkbackers and film critics.

... anyway, last thing - if the people are getting what they want, who am I to have a problem with that? Why would I? I don't have to go see it or be affected by it. Every year the same old claims of dumbing down is thrown out there, every year there's new cinematic suprises that prove that claim wrong. Ever year there's sequels, and ever year there's something new that might gain a sequel.
Big budget filmmaking is a risk-based business. Not every risk pays off, and in order to keep making money, and to exist, Hollywood makes films like these. It's a fact that it is a business. I don't have an issue with that. I see enough interesting, creative movies from around the globe to keep the brain satisfied, and plenty of high-octane joy for when I don't. There's a lot of chaff to seperate, but it's a massive industry.
What I do have an issue is when there isn't an attempt to strive to improve what's gone before, or when a complete mess is made of something promising for no reason at all. TF2 is a prime example of that. TF3 shows that big-Hollywood does sometimes listen, even if it's not a massive reinvention, but they took what people criticised about the second and improved on it without taking out what people liked or what apparently made it successful.
Anyway, rant over. I just remembered why I don't do forums anymore - so much time on nothing!

And you've certainly argued your side better than anyone else in this talkback. The "out of your tree" comment must have come off harsher than I meant it, which was as a casually ball busting figure of speech.

You guys are persistent in your continued personal vendetta against all things Michael Bay. I find it kinda adorable. I'm sure both of you think you have good tastes when it comes to movies, and I'm sure you can be articulate and intelligent in person when you don't have the protection of anonymity. But really, your arguments hold no weight when you haven't seen the films you are criticizing.

if you are going to bring scripture into your argument, you should at least understand what it was talking about. which is easy if you actually read it in context. if you read it then you see that it's talking about treating people in a loving way not about how good of a job you do criticizing other people's work. in fact, that would be a violation of the entire point of the scripture you quoted.
the comment about putting away childish things was about growing up from being an inconsiderate self centered child into an adult who is respectful of others and cares about others.
a spoiled child bitches about entertainment. an adult realizes that people worked hard to make it and even if it's not enjoyed has the respect for other people not to be a dick about it.
1 Corinthians 13 >>
New International Version
1If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,b but have not love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

OMFG!!!! Guys, remember the feeling you got when you were watching the Phantom Menace? That agonizing feeling of disappointment creeping up on you ever so slightly as the movie progressed? With each and every underwhelming scene, you gave it a pass because you KNEW the BIG payoff was just around the corner?
With TF3, that's the experience you're going to SUFFER through. For the first hour and a half there's almost NO robot action. Just human after fucking human after fucking human. I believe I can count on one hand on the amount of lines outside of Optimus Prime that were giving to the other robots.
The robots themselves were nothing but background set pieces to enhance the dismal drama going on between the humans. Almost no one took their role seriously. It's as if they were shooting a fucking Saturday Night live comedy skit. A bunch of buffoonery and tomfoolery that does nothing but only take you out of the film.
As for the so-called BIG CHICAGO INVASION! It fucking sucked ballz. It was so disappointing and lifeless that it felt like a HUGE kick in the ballz because all of these so called trusted Geek sites like AICN, HITFIX, Movieweb, Collider, etc all were fucking bought.
Michael Bay made them feel special, he invited them to watch a sneek peak, and just because they got to see this underwhelming pile of shit before anyone else Michael Bay somehow brainwashed them into thinking this movie was worth a god damn.
I'm going on the record now and I'm saying ROTF was better than this. That's who terrible TF3 was. I'm fuming so fucking bad right now I don't know what to do. TF franchise is officially dead. Bay finally put the nail in the coffin. I can on and on about this disappointment, and believe you me I will. I'm only getting started.

SPOILER ALERTS EVERYWHERE!!!
I'm a huge michael bay fanatic... I dont go into his movies expecting, Hamlet. I dont go expecting oscar caliber dialogue and performances...
It's a summer movie. He's good at making them.
Nuff said.
Give credit where it's due...
I was generally surprised at the 3-d effects. esepcially the opening intro. Very good. Everything has a viscersal effect which was what he wanted us to see.
Sam's new girlfriend: (im gonna miss megan fox, no lie, but) Guys never tell your black girlfriend. your just a hater you cant be in 3-d when a leggy ,big lipped white chick walks on screen. I spent 15 minutes apologizing, telling my girlfriend, she has no ass and she's just a skinny chick, which cooled her down. She knows im an ass man!!! lol. (im a black guy btw.lmao)
Sam the reluctant hero, wanting more for his life which was a change he seemed at first in the other movies he didnt even want to be an emisarry for the autobots.
I like the fact that he was showing more courage than the military and knew what his purpose was...
I dont wanna spoil the rest of the movie, but what i also liked was that it wasnt dumbed down... not alot of juvenile humor, and the ones it did have was did in small doses which is what bay needed to do in the first two... Dialed it down just right. Make the movie serious but still have moments of funny.
Because remember guys even though transformers had huge robots on screen breaking shit and killing things. kids and teenagers are watching, and i guess they need to have something for them too... it cant be all saving private ryan.
Agent simmons was cool in this movie, in the second one he was over the top, they finally got his character right...
Also big shoutout to my homie lester speight...
If you know who the cole train is from gears of war series and terry tate commercials from youtube, this guy kills in everything!!! i love his work...
He shined when he was on screen.
The movie was better than part two and one...
Believe it or not.
Gripes. IT DIDNT HAVE TO BE IN 3-D. mike bay could have pulled off a just a good finisher if he filmed the whole thing in HIGH DEFINITION and it would have worked anyways. the 3-d tech has always been around. but these directors need to understand what cameron, bay and shit even paul w.s. has done was film the whole movie in the format from the begining!!!
THAT'S WHY THE SHIT WORKS!!! THEY DONT DO A CONVERSION PROCESS WITH COMPUTERS AFTER THE MOVIE IS WRAPPED.
If your gonna do something do it right... you know.
It was worth the money... the music and pulse of it was amazing.
STEVE JABLONSKY... again he's the reason i brought the gears of war soundtrack.
Mike bay, you ended the movie on a high note. and have reddeemed yourself.
I want everyone to go and see it with an open mind. you might end up enjoying it...just a little. I dont get all the hate...
You've just been....
-Ghosted.
(sorry chop,lol)

by the way. you quoted my comment thrashing this movie. note that i did it without personally attacking anyone. i didn't accuse michael bay of being a lazy filmmaker. i didn't call steven spielberg a greedy whore. i didn't call AICN reviewers bought and paid for because they liked it. see, part of the fun of being a geek move lover is going off on a film that you think sucked. but going into personal attacks crosses over from ripping a movie into just being a dick. like someone who didn't enjoy their food at a restaurant and jumps down the servers throat calling the restaurant a piece of shit over it. that's just being an asshole. it's one thing to not enjoy yourself and even to complain, but to gut people and insult them for their work at their work in front of everyone. that takes being an asshole.

So what?? That's his opinion. If you don't want to see the movie, don't see the movie. I'm gonna see it today, even though I dislike the previous Transformers-movies. But I give this shit a chance. Who knows? Maybe I will enjoy myself like Massa. Maybe it's one of those guilty pleasures. And I LOVE guilty pleasures, you know. I love watching shit blows up. that's it

About a half an hour of Transformers movies is robots fighting. The other 2 hours are a series of barely connected scenes that appear to be moments from appearances by Robin Williams on talk shows.
Think about it. It all makes sense through the Robin Williams talk show appearances lens.
Oh, and did I mention that Robin Williams is high off of his fucking ass in these talk show appearances as you should also be when watching Transformers movies.

Not even close. Ladies and Gentleman Rotten Tomatoes is 110% correct on this film. This movie doesn't even deserve the 35% it's sitting at right now. 15% would be about right.
It's obvious that Steven Spielberg had Michael Bay on a short fucking leash during the TF1 production. TF3 makes TF1 look like Braveheart! And that's no exaggeration.

I don't mean to say to anyone "If you don't like it, there's something wrong with you" because there really isn't nothing wrong with you at all. All of the problems with Bay's movies are still present. What Bay manages to do this time is create something so visually enjoyable that I began to think "This is what CGI was meant to do, this is what 3-D was meant to be" in its purest sense. I meant what I said above- this is the anti-film-- so unapologetic and evil in its methods that it's actually refreshing.
I'm tired of the half-ass movies we've been getting in the action genre. These nods to character and mythology are mostly weak attempts to placate people's expectations (I'm looking at you, George Lucas). It's insincere- like the guy picking up his high school date and telling the girl's father "I promise I don't want to fuck your daughter." Of course you do! Mike Bay is honest about his intentions- he just happened to add "And I want you to watch!"

Massa is correct, a critic's job is to connect audiences to films they will enjoy. His taste aside, his reviews have always been pretty accurate representations of the films he's describing.
If I wanted a reviewer who misrepresents films simply to get me to see and it validate his taste with my time and money, I would read Drew McWeeny.

"People who prefer more mainstream stuff and people who prefer something a little more challenging.
Maybe I'm just a cranky old bastard, but I work with a lot of self-described "movie geeks" that only enjoy stuff like this. If I mention something like There Will Be Blood, Mulholland Dr. or say I want to see The Tree of Life, they say it was "slow" or "boring". "
Maybe those people shouldn't be considered true movie lovers. I think true movie lovers love both- the mainstream and the more challenging.
If someone watches mainstream movies all the time but not There Will Be Blood bc its "boring", maybe they're just someone interested in movies, but they're not a real movie lover or even a movie geek. They're just someone who wants to be entertained and that's all.
Nothing wrong with that, but I wouldn't consider them a real movie geek. But now I'm probably drawing standards I was railing against earlier.
I guess I should say, its possible to be a movie geek and not like those types of movies. But I don't think its possible to be a movie geek and *not* even watch those types of movies. A true geek would regardless.
PS: I didn't mean to imply you were elitist, just that I hate when people try to make a distinction like "if you like this, then you are not a true lover of film".

I personally loathe Transformers, but at least the little cunt has been open, finally, and admitted that he believes that film has to be objectively good and no-one can take subjective enjoyment from the medium.
What a fucking fraud-
PS, dick, where's the cheque you owe me for propping up that fucking third world toxic waste dump you call a country with my tax money?

So what's a good one, then goatfucker? One you agree with?
Wow, don't you think it would be boring if everyone had the same opinion? I'm not talking about some universal fact, like you shagging animals and being a cunt, because that's not an opinion.
What a fucking fraud.

Like i said... it didnt need to be in 3-d most of these movies dont... I just figure it's because they want more of your extra money...
If they keep making movies along the lines like avatar where 3-d is extremely well done. then maybe ill consider incorporating the technology into my home myself. but im fine with my blu-ray player and my 40inch hi-def flat screen and my pioneer surround sound system...
thank you...

The simple tale of a Portuguese goatherd, who will never know the touch of a woman due to his severe physical deformities, non-existent personal hygiene and myriad personality failings.
Growing lonely at the lack of human contact, he's forced to turn to his wooly flock for love and affection. Yet tragedy strikes when his favourite pet dies of rectal haemorrhaging
He could call it "Asimovlives: A life maligned"

No. No it is not. Anything which does not have "subtle nuances as “story”, “character” or “dialog” is, by definition, not the best. The original animated show was better, the follow-up series Beast Wars and Beast Machines was ridiculously better, the comic books are better, the fucking toys by themselves are better. Massawyrm, you like the action, ok. But please do not spit on Transformers. For all its faults, the Transformers mythology has awesome characters, excellent stories, and some pure sci-fi originality that these Bay films never captured. This trilogy has been a huge wasted opportunity.

Too true - and at this point in Bay's career, and looking at his back catalogue, why would anyone expect a story, decent dialogue and serious subtext? He tried to be serious, remember? Do none of you fuckers remember Pearl Harbour?
I'll see this - the first one was okay, the second one sucked great hanging wrecking balls. Either way, it's the place to be if I want to watch giant robots kicking the shit out of each other for a couple of hours. And, no, I won't leave my intelligence at the door - I want to be skullfucked in the brain through my irises by Michael Bay's needle-thin imagery penis.

I would hope any site that reviews movies should have to give full disclosure that as a bought and paid for opinion their thoughts have no validity in the context of a review. I don't begrudge anybody doing something they love and getting paid for it as well, but just tell us what movies are coming out and set visits etc. ,but keep reviews out of it. Because if this movie is good then GL was the Godfather of comic book movies.

I was given a free ticket because i'd done some artwork for the club below the cinema. After 2 seconds of careful concideration i gave the ticket to a friend & went ten pin bowling, an hour after the movie started my friend had left the cinema & joined us bowling "It was awful.....but not quite as bad as 'Fallen'.....just dire......" was his introspective review. Just thought i'd throw that out there as I have a sneeky feeling these 'glowing' reviews may be a little corperate influenced.

Find some whore to get your kicks off instead of spamming a talkback with retarded arguments over opinions... Where is it written that someone cannot enjoy a lame ass movie and find some shred of something cuddly in another and also like it for what it is. There is not a critic alive who has any kind of proven track record or logical approach to movie reviews that even begins to make any kind of sense because it is based off of too many outside influences at the time. If we could all not have lives and go see a movie and sit there as a blank slate we might be able to give some sort of decent review, but even then it would be lifeless.
I saw this movie last night. Unfortunately I have seen all 3 in the theaters and I am not a transformers fan. I go for my son who is 9. The second movie was terrible. I thought the first was alright, but corny and bad with character development as most agree Bay is awful at. But I do not go into a Bay movie looking for any shred of character development. I think the only time he came close was Pearl Harbor, but thats another time. This 3rd installment was to me the best of the three, but not because of any one thing. It was a bunch of things done right for once with a transformers movie. The first had a lack of robots kicking ass. I left the first one feeling like it would have been cooler to see more robots slugging it out. We got more robot action in the 2nd but I will be damned if I can remember what the plot was and why it mattered. I also did not like the action sequences in the first two. I found them hard to watch and follow. That was not the case here with the 3rd. My personal favorite was the car chase scene in the first hour when Bumblebee is hit and Sam is flying through the air screaming like a little bitch and Bumblebee stays on task keeping debri and anything else from striking Sam and then safely getting him back inside. The look on Sam's face is priceless because he did not know what the fuck was going on. It was in slo-mo yes, but that one scene and a couple of others showed the bond between the two and thats sad but it was the only sort of character building you were gonna get and you know what, thats ok because it reminded me all over again about how the two met in the first film. A bridge was formed between those two movies and it went right over the awful 2nd one in doing so. The rest of the movie was spent on trying to save humanity and the girl in distress (which btw is much more likable than trailer trash Megan Fox, which surprised me), but to me the only relationship I thought that mattered was Bumblebee and Sam. The girl could have fallen to her death and it would not have mattered to me so long as Sam and Bee were ok.
The remainder of the action was decent and kept you going. It had some lame parts, but also had some nice moments. I would have liked for one of the military gung-ho's to have died a brave death, but alas it was not to be. The girl riling up Megatron was a bit of a stretch, but meh what are ya gonna do? I would say my only complaint about the ending was that it kind of left you hanging and was cut short fast. You didn't really know if Sam gets some respect finally. There was no setup for any other movie. I could see that this might be the end, but after 3 of these you would have liked something more than a one-liner about hope, protection from Optimus. Shit when I was single I always hoped my protection would not bust open inside while getting my groove on, but thats neither here not there.

He could've made TF3 any way to his liking and no studio head is going to challange him and it would have still made him millions. Nonetheless, he chose to listen to the fans, and to the critics. That's an okay guy in my book.

That's the only thing that makes any sense as to the unanimous positive reviews. Must admit, it does look like a good stoner flick, especially in 3D. But, methinks that you'll have a different opinion upon subsequent non-stoned-out-of-your-gourd viewings.

I know everybody keeps saying the last 30 minutes of action are the reward for sitting through the first 2 hours of this movie but I just couldn't take it anymore.
Maybe I will catch it on video to see if I missed some really cool stuff in that last half hour.

Hell will probably wait for blu-ray just because would rather see First Class and Captain America, but it really amazes me how many people on here spew hate about a freaking movie and the opinion of someone who sees it. Reviews are subjective, they are opinion pieces, not journalism therefore is Mass went in expecting spectacle, and explosions, and whatever the heck else he expected and he enjoyed, well then his review was spot on. I know a lot of you expect great art out of every movie, and when the vision of the guy making it doesn't match the fan fiction you've been writing for 5 + years you get all pissy, but fact it, these movies are about one thing. Putting asses in seats to get major box office numbers. They are not about great art, or winning academy awards, or earning critical accolades. I'm sure Paramount cares more about the $319,246,193 domestic gross Transformers collected and the $402,111,870 domestic gross TF2 hauled in much more than you screaming at the top of your lungs that these movies sucked, and you calling people idiots for going to, and liking them. (Personal opinion loved the 1st, 2nd was not that good, but had parts I did enjoy.) Some of you need to learn why these movies are made, that the people on this site can write reviews based on their opinion, and still be valid even when you don't agree with them, and how to act with a modicum of tact and respect and not like petulant children. That last one more so than the rest.

Indeed it is a work of art. To say that it transcends its subject matter is an understatement. Hell it transcends critical writing itself, and utterly exposes Wyrm as the hack he is. You may want to think about hiring this guy, Harry.

Is it actual Transformers? And by that I mean do we get Robots and fighting Robots in a way where you can actually see that happening? Or is it just like the other two horrible films where Robots do a little bit but they're mainly fighting humans?
Damn you sir I greatly enjoy your reviews mainly because they usually line up with my take on films. So now I am slightly tempted though saying this is the best Transformers film. Is like saying this ice cream is the best Poop flavored in the Poop flavor series.
So again answer please; is this film actual Transformers?

I'm just down right Skeptical of this. I mean look I love action movies, and I even enjoyed Battle: LA even though that had some serious flaws. But I just hated the previous 2 Transformers films so venomously that I'm just skeptical of this no matter how spectacular the last hour is.
I'll catch it on HBO like I did the 2nd one.

Fuck. Off.
You know, in London where I live the EVENING STANDARD has an ad for TF3, with a quotation from Ain't It Cool. Thought you'd like to know that you're doing this film a favour.
Funnily enough, don't think they're using any of your quotes on the TREE OF LIFE poster.

Please tell me you are not. A comparison is stupid.
Two TOTALLY different directors, and the subject matter could not be more different if you wanted it to be.
One director makes thoughtful, insightful and beautiful films.
The other one makes noisy, splosion filled, nonsensical action orgies.
So please, just stop.
Heya Asimov, good to see you right where I expect you to be dude!

wcwlkr I have no idea of what great action is there since I left. Everybody keeps saying it finally gets good then so I'm taking their word for it.
I was a huge fan of the animated series and the first animated film that came out in 1986 or so. Each robot in that cartoon was a character.
With the movies I can barely tell any of them apart besides Optimus and Bumblebee and I really couldn't care less if any of them die.

Thanks for the coments.
As for me bashing a Bay movie unseen, really, how hard it is to guess how the movie is like? It's like arguing agaisnt gravity. Do i still need to prove the effects of gravity everytime i mention it? Same thing with Bay's movies. They have always been bad, he has always proved to be a terrible filmmaker, he has had 20 years to evolve and prove he's more then what his earlier movies gave indication and if anything he just has gone even worst. to predict that a Bay movie is crap is like predicting the effects of gravity. i don't need to fall again to know how it works, same thing with a Bay movie. The only real question is not that the movie is shit, but how shitty.

"As for me bashing a Bay movie unseen, really, how hard it is to guess how the movie is like? It's
like arguing agaisnt gravity."
You fucking hypocritical goatfucking fraud.
You are just physically incapable of understanding pure visceral enjoyment, such as Split Second. Instead you have to wrap things in some nebulous and utterly transparent cloak of "objective" (my arse) goodness.
You are a pathetic intellectual dwarf without the honesty to admit your hypocrisy.
You make me sick. Cunt.

So to insult someone because seeing a TF film is what they define as fun is stupid.
The more complex the mind, the greater the need for simple pleasures.
Who provides more mindless stuff than Bay? No one.
Just because one person does not want or need mindless fun does not make them any better or smarter than someone who does.
Different strokes people.
If you hate Bay and everything he does, fine, don't go see his fucking films. That's what kills me, is that you see people bitch and moan about how Bay sucks so bad, yet they still go see his films....THAT is the definition of retarded people.
I am far from a Bay defender, but I do defend free will and the right to individual opinions and tastes, a concept that is foreign to many who come to this site.
Rant over, resume normal TB'ing.

And how much love you are showing for your fellow man, as in like Massa's review, by urging them to became deliberatly dumb so they can enjoy a dumbed down cynical movie made by souless greedyu bastards who have no talent and no respect for their own target public? How will you reply to that?

Who's mor ein the right to rip a new asshole? The people who complains about being ripped off or the fraudulent people who ripp off? Your coments, please.
I'm a paying consumer. The moment i payed for their work i earned the right to criticise. I payed to watch their former movies, i got served shit, i earned the right long ago. I payed that right. And Bay and all those who ar emaking this Shitformers movies are not doing non-profitable charity work. they are making a product which we get payed to see, and they earned riches form our money. As such, they are the target of of all criticism that leveled at them. they can either accept it and learn, if they can, or they can became assholes and bash and bitch about those who made them rich. The later is being a real asshole. complaining that you were served a shit product is not being an asshole, it's exerting your right as a consumer.
You could say i could be more constructive in my criticism, but would it work? No i will not. Bay is not smart enough to understand the difference. His movies are proof of that.

I don't care how good it is (supposedly). The first movie sucked balls. I rented the second movie and could not even make it through the whole film. I will check the new one out when it's free on cable.
The first two were so bad it is not too hard to be better so that does not say much for the third installment. Bay sucks balls and so do his movies.

I think everyone will agree that it doesn't really matter if it's better than the Previous 2 films.
When the previous 2 were complete and utter crap how hard can it really be to be better than those. I just can't bring myself to pay to see this plain and simple. When it's on HBO I'll check it out until then I just don't care.

A critics job is to give his opinion on the movie, period. Just because you think it's a POS and he doesn't, doesn't mean that critic hasn't done his job. You think TF3 is crap? Fine, but doesn't make a critics review invalid because he doesn't agree.

Didn't see the second. No reason to watch this.
My problem was not that it was all about action or destruction, it was that what action the first had was lame and not exciting at all (which surprised me for a Bay film), and there was so much inane and pointless filler to endure. From reviews of the sequels it sounds like nothing has changed at all.

If you read his stuff you get a good sense of who he is and what he likes. I'm not making judgments on him, just saying... and the same is true for Harry and the rest. You don't need a reviewer to be "right" all the time for them to be useful to you, you just need to understand what makes them tick and what they go for or hate about movies. Then their opinions can help inform you on ANY film.

That is not a critics job at all, their job is simple....watch movies, and write their opinions, and let the people reading make their own choices on what to see.
They are not sheephearders, leading us to the promised land, they are movie fans, just like us, and they don't know any more about movies than either you or I do.
They are movie fans with journalism degrees, plain and simple. i don't know about you, but I don't need a critic to tell me what to see, I see what I want based on my own personal tastes, I don't go by what someone else says, that is for mindless sheep, of which I am not, and last time I checked, neither are you.
As far as what you said was a broad generalization from me, simple pleasures are different things to different people, we are not all the same, what is simple pleasure to one person may be complex to another. Who is to say what is a simple pleasure and what is not? Some people may see miniature golf as an intense experience that requires concentration and focus, while others see it as a simple game.
Not everything is black and white dude. It's not as simple as good/bad. right/wrong, simple/complex, there are a lot of grey areas in life. Perhaps not for you, and you would be the exception to the rule, but for most of us life is not a matter of black and white.
Oh I miss these philosophical discussions with you...he he.

Do you really want a critic to think for you? Do you really just want a critic who will not even write reviews, one who will just give a movie a thumbs up or a thumbs down?
Do you really believe the world will produce another individual with the exact same taste as you who is willing to watch all movies and then decide whether or not to recommend them to you with 100% success?
Give me a break. A good critic can give you an idea of what a movie is like without spoiling plot surprises and leave you to make up your own mind about whether or not to see it. Most people are up to this mental challenge.
The critic's actual enjoyment of the material is second to their ability to accurrately describe it. I can't count the number of times a critic has written a negative review that still left me wanting to see the movie simply because he described something that he didn't like but I would.

The profession of a Critic is not necessarly to protect Moviegoers from bad films, but to provide detail why they either approve or dislike a film. (as well as the film's synopsis)
Giving the viewer/reader the option to see the Movie or avoid at all costs. And like Geekhatersuck had hinted, it's opinioned based.
In the end, what works for one may not work for the other. I, myself will take it all in and if (from the critics' input.) there's something that doesn't gel, I for the most part would forgo seeing the film.
However, there have been many times that a Critic has been off track like say the iconic Roger Ebert who gave the first Spiderman film 1 thumb down. He also gave a Thumbs down to Escape From New York but mentioned how Escape from LA was a go for broke extranvaganza.
No critic is fool proof so it's always best to take what you can from the reviews or to some extent listen to what your friend who may have seen it, have to say.
At the end of the day, everyone's a critic because everyone has an opinion.

You think a critics's job is just to give a egotistical opinion of what he thinks of a movie and that's it? No. a movie critici is more then that. a move critic is a controller of quality. And if he thinks he is not that, he fails at his job. a film critici has to be more then just a putz expression his opinion in public. Any fool can do that. If you want to be a movie critic, you have to realise you have a responsability.

Yeeoouch! Now THAT'S fucking hatred.
Glad to hear that said devoted TF fans (Transfans?) didn't buy into Bay's bullshit but most of the blame still lies within the so called Writers: Orci and Kurtzman.
Bay is a fucking hack, but he doesnt deserve ALL the hate, just most of it for making a shitfest of the first two movies and I highly doubt that the 3rd act is better by leaps and bounds.

I full heartedly disagree with everything you said. You have no business actually criticizing a film that you haven't seen. It doesn't matter who directed, who wrote it, who produced it. You may speculate the quality of the film, but your argument would then be invalidated by anyone, even a child, who has seen the film. I'm not saying you have to see every movie to talk about it, I'm just saying you cannot criticize a film with the conviction that you have when you haven't seen the movie. I've liked almost every Steven Spielberg film I've seen, but I'm not going to go to the Tintin or Warhorse talkback and call every person who talks negatively about the film an idiot.
I believe that a person brings as much into the theatre with them as a film is bringing to that person. Film is a powerful medium because it allows a person to relate their life experience in such a personal way to what is happening on screen. So what dictates a person's verdict about a film goes so much deeper than just what is happening on screen. I have no doubt you are honest about your point of view of the Michael Bay and his films. But perhaps your dislike of him goes a little deeper than just the quality of his films. It could be anything from political, to personal history, to even a cultural thing. I'm simply saying that it's okay to dislike a film, but to go to such a length that you and IK go to to personally insult the people that like these films is a bit much. I'm sure you don't do this in life, or to this extent when you are talking to someone face to face. If you are anywhere in the OC, I'd love to get lunch and pick your brain. I love Michael Bay and his films. Whenever I watch them I always seem to get more, and relate more, to them than anyone else. His films just seem to agree with me. Too many reasons why to list here.
So really, take it back a bit guy... I know it doesn't benefit you in anyway to do so, but it doesn't hurt either. And it is always a good idea to be a well reasoned and nice person, even on the internet.

Critcis are sheppards. But we are not sheep. A sheppard doesn't have to be a dictator, he can be a guide. To wit:
Critics are teachers. They are guides. They are opinion makers. They offer the guidelines. They are the farmer who seperate the grain from the sow. They are quality controllers.
Or rather, the good critics are that. Those that take their job seriously. Those who work as a film critic because they love cinema, because they have a call, because they want to uphold cinema as a form of art and entertaiment (things that are not mutually exclusive, quite the contrary).
If a critic is on the level, that's what he's aspires, and that's what he does.
a critic that doesn't do that, that his only actions is just posting mere so-called personal opinions of which he can't defend them weith anything more then a vague "i had fun", that's not a critic. It's just an opiniated fanboy. That's easy. That's too easy. The hard part is to actually be a critic, as one should be.
Critics can't be always right. But they make an effort to be. And they have to argue why they should be right. just the fune xcuse is nothing. to be a critic it demands more.
You could say, but there's hardly many critics out there as you say a critic should be in your post. and i would agree with you, no there aren't unfortunatly. But just because those who fail at their job are the majority doesn't make them to be the example to aspire of their profession.
And let me just ask this to you and really, be on the level: are you going to tell me you nelever learne danything from a critic about movies? Because i have. I have learned form filmmakers, from writers, from critics, from fellow geeks and talkbackers. I have learned and learned and learned. I am not my only fountain of my knowledge of cinema. And thank goodness for that. I'm aware of that. So i thank the critics for existing as i thank filmmakers and my fellow geeks.
There's mroe to a critic then just a guy with a personal opinion putting it on a public display. Those who cannot understand that do not understand the function of a critic. And that includes critics as well.

Jeez just admit you're wrong here. They don't control quality, and they're certainly not supposed to protect us from bad movies.
They are to tell us what they think is good or bad, and then as free-thinking humans, we take that opinion/analysis and decide if the movie is for us or not.

A critic is not a controller of quality, that is no where near what his job is, because there is NO definitive authority on quality.
Controllers of quality? Film makers, that's who, not critics...they report on quality, they do not control it, and their reports on quality are nothing more than their own personal opinions, period.
As already stated, a critics job is to give his opinion on the films they see based on their own knowledge of film, and let the readers/viewers decide, period.
Do you really believe a movie critic knows more about film than you or I? Are you really that naive? Taking a few film courses does not make you an expert on film. I took film courses in college, so guess what? I know as much as a movie critic knows. The only difference between a movie critic and me is I don't have a degree in journalism.

To answer your question...No, I have never learned anything from a movie critic about film. I learned from courses I took in college, from interviews with actors, directors, producers, and yes even fellow film geeks. But critics? Nope, they are and always have been nothing more than movie fans with journalism degrees.
I am even willing to bet that at least half the film critics out there never even took one single film course in school.
I am the final judge of a films quality, not any critic. I see what interests me, not what someone else tells me is good or bad. I don't need anyone to tell me what is good or bad, because no one person is alike, what is good to one is not always good to another and that's what you need to realize, there is no such thing as just good or bad, there are no absolutes...maybe there are for you, but like I said, your the exception.

You highly overvalue the role of a critic. The definition of a critic is 1. One who forms and expresses judgments of the merits, faults, value, or truth of a matter.
2. One who specializes especially professionally in the evaluation and appreciation of literary or artistic works: a film critic; a dance critic.
No where does that mention anything about quality, control, guiding others to good cinema, or any other such nonsense that you are ranting about. A critic is paid to give their evaluation on the work they are observing. It is their paid opinion, just like a politicial or sports analyst paid to write for a paper or magazine, or appear on television. Not to be some sort of guiding force for the masses.

I just dont get it. i read aint it cool every morning while at work, and i've done so for years. if i found it to be unpleasant i wouldnt return. The site has certainly changed for the worse over the years, what with all the hate and complaining. It used to be more optimistic, but i understand part of that is because people get tired of shitty movies. Beyond that i think a lot of people just want to be assholes. I dont think there's really a reason to attack the reviewers on this site personally or to talk shit about movies just because you know other people love it. I know we're here to discuss movies, but people trashing Jurassic Park or Indiana Jones, classic stuff like that-???!!! I call bullshit. Anyways, Thanks to Harry for starting this shit,and your enthusiasm. Thanks Vern for all those DVD's in my collection that i otherwise wouldn't have, and the best reviews i have ever read. Thanks Beaks for True Legend on the big screen and the fun time at Bad Teacher. thanks to Moriarty for Trick 'R Treat- My son still has the book signed by Michael Dougherty. Thanks to Copernicus for the science lessons, Capone for his no-nonsense reviews and Massawyrm from whom i have learned a lot. I can always count on his reviews to be as objective as possible and very professionally done. Even when i don't agree, I can see his point. Thank you Quint for your professionalism and great interviews as well as accurate reviews, and to all the rest of you who put in work so i can know just a little more. Thanks to all the talkbackers with the names that crack me up. Some of you are really talented writers who contribute great opinions and ideas. Even if i don't agree with all of you, i appreciate your opinion. Lastly, Fuck all the no-life-having trolls, the personal attackers and people who hate Harry and the site yet continue to come back. It's your right i guess, but fuck you anyway. Thanks aint it cool, for all the info. even if you get scooped by another site-i'd rather hear it from you.

Massawyrm "gets" what reviews are for. You don't (or at least aren't supposed to) decide on a movie simply because some reviewer did or didn't like it.</p>
<p>
The review is supposed to present a coherent rationale for WHY a particular reviewer did or didn't like a movie. Whether someone liked a movie doesn't mean anything...but their reasoning does.</p>
<p>
If someone says they loved some movie for the slapstick humor and its imitation of Monty Python, that should be a clue as to whether you'll like the movie. It means that if you hate Monty Python, don't waste your time.</p>
<p>
Also, I appreciate when reviewers admit enjoying (if not really liking) a particular movie. This helps to denote a movie as a guilty pleasure. It IS possible to not particularly see much merit in a film, but still enjoy it as an experience when all is said and done.</p>
<p>
I think the Wyrm nails his review. He leaves NOTHING to chance that you'll get the wrong impression of the movie...big, brash, loud, in-your-face-action with a thin plot and virtually zero dramatic story arc or character development...but still bigger and better than the first two.</p>
<p>
'Nuff said.

Thank you for validating my OBJECTIVE opinion about what a piece of shit you are.<br><br>Claiming that film can and should be reviewed objectively just shows what an obtuse fool you are. Way to hang your ass out for everyone to see. Not only that you've completely validated my opinion that you are a humorless douche. That's my OBJECTIVE opinion.<br><br>Art can't be reviewed objectively idiot...that what makes it art. You really must be a lot of fun at parties with all your OBJECTIVE opinions.<br><br>Here are some more OBJECTIVE opinions. You have no friends. You've never touched a woman. You are a boring cunt.

Some reasons made him the only AICN staffer still worth reading: 1- He wrote entertaining and well-written and well-structured reviews, like a pro. Compare Massa's reviews with Harry's stupid bablings. I cannot read anything Harry bangs on his keyboard anymore, the fat fuck. Massa is a good writter. 2- Massa used to bash films, and he would explain why he hated it with CLEAR reasons. 3- Massa had a credibility record of bad reviews to bad films WAAAY higher than other AICN staffers. But now Massa is sold out.

All the local New York slammed TF3. The only semi-positive one was a back-handed compliment from the NY Times.
Even the quote-whore, easy touch New York Post gave it zero stars, out of four or five, as did Long Island's Newsday.
The Post's reviewer in fact said, that even the 3-D work, contrary to the studio publicity machine releases, is shoddily done, often blurry and in very low light, requiring the critic's 3-D glasses to be taken off to make sure that it wasn't the projection.

It's two o'clock on a Wednesday
The regular crowd is logging in
There's a 40-yr-old typin' next to me
Bitchin' about his comics and Tintin.
He says, "CHOP, can you please lay off of me.
I'm not really sure how to respond.
I'm trying to eat while attempting trying to beat
This burrito in my Supes underoos."
la la la, di da da
La la, di di da da dum
(CHORUS)
CHOP us a fool, you're the CHOPPAH man
CHOP us a fool tonight
Well, we're all in the mood for some CHOPPIN'
And you've got us all feelin' all right
Now Cobes at the bar is a friend of mine
He lets me in the Dojo for free,
And he's quick with a joke and he'll roll ya a smoke
But there's some place that he'd rather be
He says, "CHOP, I believe this is killing me,"
As his smile ran away from his face,
"Well I'm sure that I could be a karate star
If I could get out of AICN."
Oh, la la la, di da da
La la, di da da da dum
Now ceejay's a Transformers lover
Who's never had desire for a wife
And there's my friend Asi, who's indeed quite crazy
and wants to end JarJar Abrams' life.
And Mr. Beaks is wankin' to rape films
As Massawyrm quickly gets stoned
Yes, they're sharing a life with Harold Knowles
But it's better than geekin' alone.
(CHORUS)
CHOP us a fool, you're the CHOPPAH man
CHOP us a fool tonight
Well, we're all in the mood for some CHOPPIN'
And you've got us all feelin' all right
It's a pretty good crowd for a Wednesday
And my buddy Quint gives me a smile
'Cause he knows that it's me the geeks've been comin' to see
To whine about their life for a while
And my CHOPPING, it befits a true carnivore
And Ryan Dunn's remains smell like a beer
The geeks sit at home, buffing their meat dome
And say, "CHOP, so what if I'm queer?"
Oh, la la la, di da da
La la, di da da da dum
(CHORUS)
CHOP us a fool, you're the CHOPPAH man
CHOP us a fool tonight
Well, we're all in the mood for some CHOPPIN'
And you've got us all feelin' all right

you can complain about how much you think a movie sucks without personally attacking people about it.
you can write about how much you think a movie sucks. how your experience watching the movie sucks. how pissed you are that you were let down by another movie that didn't live up to the trailers.
you can write about how crazy anyone must be who likes the movie. how bad of taste they have. what dorks they are. how they must have the maturity of kids to enjoy a kid's movie.
but you can do it without making personal attacks on people. you don't go personal. you don't say something that could actually cause harm to someone.
in a restaurant if your food is bad and you want your money back then you ask for it, but you don't throw a temper tantrum to get it. you can't ask for your time back, so, don't flip out over how you want the last hour of your life back. don't accuse people of trying to cheat you. especially not in front of other people. you had one bad eating experience... put it into perspective... it's not worth losing your shit over. which is why everyone else who witnesses you losing your shit over it thinks you are an asshole. 1, because you obviously think that a bad eating experience is worth tearing another person a new asshole and 2, because your flip out is ruining everyone else's eating experience.
if you want your money back, go get it. respectfully. if you want to cry over it some more do it after you leave the restaurant. make your loved ones spent 15 minutes wondering why they put up with someone who's an adult but still cries over spilled milk.
and the same goes for movies. just have respect. complain but don't gut people and don't ruin everyone else's time. think about people other than yourself. all of them. not just the ones who agree with you.
and when you come to a free website to talk about movies... don't fucking go after the character of the hosts of the website. there's absolutely no excuse for that. if you really think they are only interested in making a living off of their website (god forbid) instead of making you happy to visit then go fucking say so somewhere else! don't get in their face about it at their place of work. don't accuse them of being either an imbecile or morally corrupt in front of everyone at their fucking job! that's just being an asshole.

Oh Choppah man, where you gonna run to?
Choppah man, where you gonna run to?
Where you gonna run to?
All long dem day.
Well you run to Harry, "Validate me!"
Run to Quint, "Validate me!"
You to Massa, "Validate me, Lord!"
All long dem day.

Yeah, I've had less time to spend on the boards with work being so crazy for a year straight. One year without any vacation days at all... luckily things are getting better. And seeing TF3 made me nostalgic for the days we all shared with the first movie's release, etc. It's good to be back and thank you man!

I was really pulling for it, I really was but about an hour in, it completely hit me.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon is a 100% bonafied piece of shit. It's better than Revenge of the Fallen, but thats mainly because the more racist elements were swerved. It also gave me a massive fucking headache.
Whats good:
- Well. It is actually a tiny bit funny in places.
- CGI is great as per usual.
- The score was excellent, I'm really beginning to like Steve Jablonsky.
- Alan Tudyk was great as the german. But then, he's great all the time.
The Bad:
When I pay to see a Transformers movie, I want a Transformers movie. One where humans are at our lowest ebb and the autobots are our last hope. What I dont pay to see are:
- Humans killing more robots than robots do.
- Patrick fucking Dempsey being the main villain.
- Megatron being annihilated in roughly 4 seconds having been ignored for the entire movie.
- One of the most famous characters being killed by a human (Starscream)
- One of the other famous characters being treated as a vindictive scumbag who tries to kill prisoners, instead of being the cold calculated sidekick he is famous for. (Soundwave)
- Shockwave...what was the fucking point exactly? Oh, and yes. He also gets killed by humans.
- Did I mention Patrick fucking Dempsey? PATRICK FUCKING DEMPSEY.
- The opening 90 minutes of the film again being based solely around humans just being irritants.
- Speaking of irritants, the decision to turn Sam into a total whiny prick.
You get the jist, the film was called Transformers: Dark of the Moon, yet the bots from both sides were probably active for about 30% of a two and a half hour movie.
Avoid like the fucking plague, they didnt learn a single lesson from the last one and didnt transfer anything about the first one that made me enjoy it so much. Once again, Ehren Kruhger fucks up a franchise, the talentless piece of shit, total prick.

DOTM is the GREATEST TRANSFORMERS anything! I've seen it twice and will see it again tonight. Probably will see it two more times after that. As soon as the bluray drops, its mine! The PERFECT Transformers film I could ever, ever hope for.

The bashing isn't because we cannot grasp the concept of film made for art and film made for entertainment. It's because its execution was so piss-poor!
2 hrs & 45mins of which the majority was mindless expostion, lame attempts at humor and sequence after sequence that had nothing to do with one another! I actually thought that the action scenes were much improved over the last two films, but the same issues that plagued the 1st two films were still present in this one. And despite what Massa's review claims, Bay seemed to cram even more of that shit in this film!
Had the movie been an hour shorter it would have been pretty good. And to all you Bay Knights who defend his approach to filmmaking - if you're in it for the action scenes, and gloss over the other aspects (story, acting, dialogue) why not just admit that the movie was half bad?
Obligitory sports analogy - It's like defending LeBron James' performance in the Finals. Sure for half of the game he was pretty great. But for the other half he didn't deliver. Would you call that a positive performance?

Yes, it's better than the last abomination, but that's akin to saying it's better to walk in cat shit than dog shit. Either way you have just walked in shit.
SPOILERS FOLLOW!!!!!!!!
Maybe I'm dense, but why were they trying to bring Cybertron back? Wasn't it effectively destroyed? What good would having it back be? Another moronic bad guy plot. And why were there Decepticons coming out of the moon - other than because it looked cool.
It is classic Bay: great scope, flash visuals, and some well-staged set-pieces but all undone by his inability to edit and pace. Also, without characters to care for, these scenes are empty. A simple knife fight in a closet with two god characters is more effective than Bay destroying an entire city filled with vapid human beings.
Then you have all of the jingoistic tripe, crass immature humour, objectification of women, vague racism... why would a robot have any interest in going through a human woman's knicker drawer? Idiotic.
As for the 3D - can't wait for this fad to die. It's the first 3D film I have seen in a year and I regret it. Bay's use is better than most with his camera gliding through space, but it added nothing of substance. Ironically, 3D has probably calmed his fast cutting which made action easier to follow, but the character design is still so poor that it's difficult to make out who is who.
Anybody who tells you this is good is lying. If you didn't like the first two - or Bay in general - definitely don't go.
At least I got to see a good little horror film called Stake Land - a fraction of Transformers' budget but more exciting, interesting and intelligent.

Autobots show up, destroy something, then... cut back to America without any difference to the plot. Pointless, soulless eye candy.
Oh, and all those who say 'It's a popcorn movie' or 'It's based on a toy - it can never be great' - go to hell.
It's that attitude that gave us Batman & Robin. Had Nolan taken that attitude we wouldn't have gotten The Dark Knight. Any subject matter can make a good film if treated in the correct manner. Transformers could have been great, but it was botched by Bay, Spielberg and their cronies.

And later tonight I'll go home and know that I was able to enjoy a movie, and not feel compelled to tear it to shreds. I'll be happy, and I'll hope that cynics who appear unable or unwilling to just try to enjoy something find happiness. And peace. And doves will fly overhead, and it will be a marvelous world- because I'll be happy, and because I enjoyed Transformers 3.<P>

You come to these boards just to bash movies and ACIN reviewers because it makes you feel big – or that your personal taste in movies is superior to everyone else’s.
This site is called AINT-IT-COOL-NEWS for fucks sake…the whole things designed for geeks, not those looking for high art.
You know what. I can love the fucking shit out of a movie like King's Speech because it ticks all the boxes in the acting, writing, directing department. It’s a movie made for adults.
But I can also love TF3 because I’m a big kid at heart. The Transformers cartoons and movies are aimed at kids! Yes kids!!! And you come here thinking it should be fucking Shakespeare.
TF3 is jam packed with stuff some adult movie goers won’t like, or think is stupid – and they’d be right. But if you in any way can relate to your inner child, you’ll love TF3 for simply being a hell of a fun time at the movies! It aint rocket science, but I walked out of the theatre with a big smile on my face.
Thanks to Massa and the rest of the AICN crew for actually having the balls to say they liked TF3 when most other “professional" reviewers wouldn’t dare to do the same because their reputation is more important than an honest opinion.

ROCKING YOUR BALLS OFF SUMMER 2011
ITS TOO BIG FOR THE SUMMER
ITS THE MOVIE OF THE YEAR
DEAL WITH IT
IF YOU CANT HANDLE DOG FART JOKES MICHAEL BAY DOESNT NEED YOU, GTFO OF HIS THEATER AND GO SEE THAT NEW WOODY ALLEN MOVIE WITH THE OTHER 3 PEOPLE

I wish EVERY film was great. What a world that would be. Then I wouldn't have to sit through two hours of drivel like Transformers, Green Lantern, The Hangover 2, etc.
I don't want any film to be rubbish, but, unfortunately, so many are.

...are as stupid as Bay, in fact they have the same mentality as he does. Bay does not like Transformers, he even said it's "stupid toys". Bay's defenders accuses the "haters" of snobbery, in fact Bay is the snob, because he looks down on the source material.
Toy Story is based around toys, yet manages to be great, maybe because it has story and characterisation, hmm?
It's all to do with how the material is approached; that's the difference between Batman & Robin and Dark Knight.
Critics who use the "its based on toys" argument are basically echoing and supporting Bay.
See, the Transformers source material is actually pretty damn great, especially the comics, the UK comics and War Within especially. That's why Bay is a arrogant dickhead for saying TF is "American", when the Japanese and Brits have as much claim to it.
The transforming gimmick is what sells the toys, but what separates TF from other toylines is it actually has other core concepts which give it breadth and depth.
These are the core concepts:
1. Sentient Robots, able to think and feel. In contrast to most sci-fi, these robots are not "discovering" sentience or emulating it, they are truly, 100% thinking, feeling beings.
2. Each Transformer has their own motives, reasonings, and personality. They are "everymen" , with a range of personalities as diverse as humans, and many of them recognisable to humans.
3. The Transformers were created by a God (Primus) to fight another god. Their ability to transform was an emulation of Unicron, the Chaos Bringer.
This takes the "god created man in his image" and turns it on its head.
All the above elements are missing from Bayformers.
1. Bay sees the Transformers as machines. He demanded more doo-dads so he could make the machinery look cool, at the expense of the TF's characters. Bay shows a total lack of interest in the TFs voices (they are mostly bland and generic robot voices in contrast. The cartoons, and especially the comics, embraced the TFs as vivid characters, Hollywood can only do cute robots or mindless battle-mechs.
2. Bay ignores a fundamental core aspect of Transformers by making most of the Decepticons empty drones. Even the Autobots are not much more than Optimus' mooks, while Bumblebee is the typical "Hollywood cute robot pet".
3. Hardly surprising this element is missing, they have conspicuously cut out the Primus stuff, probably out of fear of upsetting the religious right.
The Transformers are CHARACTERS, not CGI set-pieces. Its such bollocks to say we must have humans so audiences can relate, when the comics and cartoons managed to make us relate to the robots. That is how lazy and incompetent Hollywood writers are. FFS Furman advised them to "write the Transformers the same way you would a human", yet the TFs dialogue, when they actually get to speak, is terrible, Optimus and co are basically robot Donald Expositions.
Shockwave, an iconic sci-fi villain, utters not a single line in DotM. But that figures, after all, Shockwave is all about logic, and there's no place for logic in a Bay film.
It amuses me that no one had the wit to cast Nimoy as Shockwave rather than Sentinel Prime.
The fight between Ultra Magnus and Galvatron in the UK comics DESTROYS anything Bay has to offer; it has dramatic tension and amazing characterisation. We care about Magnus in that fight.
Honestly, to say you can't make a smart, entertaining film about sentient robots able to think and feel, with diverse personalities which provide a filmmaker with just about anything his canvas demands, is just ignorance and low standards.

It's an eye-fuck!
Turn your brain off! (We turned ours off at THOR and plan to never turn them back on!)
Bay-nality all bayed up all the bay to bayth!
I saw TRANSFORMERS!
I'm with Stupid, the fucktard who saw TRANSFORMERS!
You're all an embarrassment to your grandparents. Good thing none of you like girls. You won't breed.

The only thing you’ll find different from every other Bay film is that someone finally told him that when something is happening simultaneously all over the world, it probably shouldn’t be afternoon everywhere when it does. He’s discovered how the sun works.

Mate, at the TF3 screening I attended, the cinema was filled with kids who were lapping the film up, with laughing and applause throughout.
I'm not saying its for everyone, but both the Transformers cartoons and movies are filled with crap aimed at kids!
If you hated the previous Transformer movies for this reason, or just despise Bay as a director, then why even bother going to see the film?
Or for the same reason coming here to tell everyone who does enjoy these flicks that they're stupid?
I like many different films - from art house to blockbuster - and for a ridiculous over the top time at the movies you can't go wrong with TF3.

Just cause they passed the Gay law in NYC doesn't mean the Talkbacks gotta be. I mean, I haven't read every single post yet, but, come on, people!!
Fuck doggit! When this movie started, I was like, did I just die and go to Ass Openers #69 nirvana??

I've seen the flag waving mentioned several times, always negatively.
I'm gonna tell you what, you people really need to learn the difference between jingoism and patriotism. It could save your life.
Michael Bay has a deep love of the armed forces, this is clear, and he isn't afraid to show it. He shows our men and women as serious, dedicated professionals. He makes them looks DAMN good. You see orders work down their way through the chain of command, no hand-wringing, no wailing and thrashing about how hard life is, you see that show go from battle field to commander down the chain until that Tomahawk cruise missile is blowing up Decepticon scum. Our men and women are portrayed decently, and I appreciate that a great deal.
But at the same time, he's not all "America, fuck yeah!" He doesn't even approach that level of mindlessness. He trashes politicians, he doesn't seem to have any love for mindless bureaucrats, and he snickers at many cultural affectations. That scene with Bill O'Reilly...it must have gone over Bill O's head that he was basically being mocked in that scene. He's not exactly setting out to be Captain America here.
But it seems that to some people if you don't portray at least one American soldier as a braindead psychologically damaged baby-eating rapist than somehow it's rightwing agitprop. And that's the kind of fake pussy idea that only someone with an "educated" opinion can have. That's just fucking sad.
Also, the other reason I like the military aspect of these films? Cause then I can pretend these Transformers movies double as Transformers/GI Joe crossovers. But without characters like Duke and Lady Jaye and Scarlett. Admit it, we all wish Michael Bay had had first dibs on making a GI Joe movie. That shit would be so cash. I'd give Bay a fistful of cash and the chance to finger my daughter's virgin squeakhole (if I had a daughter that is).

That could very well be one of the worst movies I have ever seen... that truly made no fucking sense. There's no way the last hour or two could have made up for the first hour of senseless garbage I just watched. That was like a Victoria's Secret commercial colliding with a Ford commercial at high-speed in the desert.

He makes it so easy for anyone with two brain cells to rub together to discern that his movies are, well, um, retarded.
He is actively insulting your intelligence and laughing about it. In your fukkin' faces and all the way to the Swiss bank.
Now if only we could get such honesty from Saint Nolan.
INCEPTION and THE DARK KNIGHT are as visually incoherent and muddled as anything Bay has churned out.
But Nolan, the fanboy heart-throb, wears a suit on set and knows how to dress up his messes with pseudo-intellectual thematic babble and convoluted, illogical plots disguised as intricate, thoughtful ones.
And, to his very minor credit, he's not a fan of dick and fart jokes.
You know what separates Nolan from Bay?
A better vocabulary.

Since you obviously have more of an understanding of the concept/source material than that hack Bay.
It's high time for a reboot within the next five years. That's how long it will take for moviegoers to erase the memories of seeing his "adaptations".

It's well documented that you walked out halfway through Inception and that you despise Nolan's take on your beloved Batman.
Just stop repeatedly using a movie as an example that you admit not having seen it.
You're better than that. At least you used to be.

Quote: "I am the final judge of a films quality, not any critic. I see what interests me, not what someone else tells me is good or bad. I don't need anyone to tell me what is good or bad, because no one person is alike, what is good to one is not always good to another and that's what you need to realize, there is no such thing as just good or bad"
Good point and even though I have friends who share the same interests, however I can't always take their opinions as the gospel truth as they have been wrong about a film more than twice. A Proffesional critic should no longer be held as the high standard when giving their reviews of media be it Films, Music or videogames.
Nowdays, there's qute a few "Professional" Critics that avoid the proper guidelines instead some could trash a potentually great film because of bias, one minor flaw or just because s/he was pissed at something or someone and wrote a damning piece instead of praise.
Then or course there are those that are on the take. Swag, Money and or Bitches.
Although I have the utmost respect for Ebert, there has been many times that his reviews come off for the sake of objectivism or simply just didn't get it. I.E. Kick Ass.
And who's to say that he isn't bitter since his career as a screenwriter didn't take off?
(have you ever seen Beyond the Vally of the Dolls?!?) LIke I have previously mentioned, I can dissect the critics' review based on synopsis and why something works enough to see a film or purchase a game.
but to ultimetly trust his opinions and blindly go into seeing a film I may dispise or avoiding it
while never knowing that it could be something worthy of my Blu-Ray collection, is not a good procedure. I have learned a few things about Movies, but the majority of lessions did not come from Critics.

I wasn't going to pay to see this as number 2 was so bad it made me angry. I took my son to see it today based on the reviews here, AICN hated number 2 for the same reasons I did so I thought I would be safe. How wrong was I??
I am very shocked at the positive reviews from the staff here and I am genuinely very suspicious of them. I can't imagine how so many people from one source can give a pass to this steaming pile of shit. Especially when they have been so vocally negative in the past and this is more of the same and even worse in many respects. Have they been paid? I strongly suspect that they have.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon is a total mess on a scale comparable to Tranformers: Revenge of the Fallen. What little plot there is is terrible. The acting is terrible. The editing is terrible. Some of tye effects are very good but nothing ground breaking. Nothing even happens for the first 2 hours. The film is just a bunch of random scenes thrown together for 2 hours and then a pathetic excuse to get some characters into Chicago to witness the mayhem for 40 minutes, which isn't even that good. Then there's a 20 second speech and the end credits roll.

The smarmy art school grad?
The compulsive DVD buyer?
The blowhard?
The pervert?
The closeted homosexual(s)?
The drunkard?
You fukks spend too much time giggling and playing grab-ass together in your secret hideout. You're all starting to sound like each other.
Um, CHOPPED.

The movie opens opens 50 years ago, with voiceover describing the long, cataclysmic Cybertronian War between the Autobots and Decepticons that left the mechanical planet in ruins. A close up of Cybertron reveals multiple layers of metal plates stacked one upon another, instead of ground, with each plane saturated with a seemingly infinite number of robots in all shapes and sizes annihilating one another. In the midst of this planet-wide battle, a large starship is seen rocketing through gaps in all the metal plates, hotly pursued by twin fighters. The voiceover reveals the ship is the Autobot Ark, piloted by Sentinel Prime, the leader of the Autobots before Optimus Prime. Aubobot legend has it that Sentinel Prime made one last impossible gambit to win the Cybertronian War, by jetting the Autobots' most futuristic technology away from the battle in hopes of staging a counter attack against the Decepticons. But in this escape flight, the Ark was severely damaged and ricocheted into space, not to be heard from again.
The Ark crash-lands on Earth's moon in 1961, with seemingly no survivors. Sentinel Prime locked himself into a vault on the ship, along with the Autobots' futuristic war-ending technology. NASA detects a crash of something large on the moon and immediately launches an investigation to determine what it could have been. President Kennedy ignites the space race to beat the Soviets to the moon. It's determined through the course of the movie that every US and USSR space effort between 1961 and 1972 involved recovering whatever was possible from the Ark's wreckage. Archival footage of Kennedy, Walter Cronkite, and also President Nixon is used in establishing shots showing the various US missions in the Apollo program -- and what they "really" were for. When Neil Armstrong lands on the moon and delivers his "one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind speech", people listening to the radio and watching TV believe there's a 20-something gap in the broadcast because of technical difficulties, but in reality ,NASA send Armstrong and his fellow astronaut into the Ark's wreckage for the first time, telling him that he has 20 minutes to explore it before he has to broadcast more for the American public back home.
The astronauts enter the Ark and declare that everything inside is dead. They find the bodies of various Autobot robots, most still manning the gun turrets they were blasting before the ship crashed. Inside the cavernous wreck, the two humans seem tiny and begin scavenging for whatever technological bits and pieces they can take back to Earth with them. They do not discover the Ark's vault with Sentinel inside, but do find large metal faces, as they call them, which disturb NASA and necessitate the subsequent Apollo missions through 1972 to continue investigations of this crash site.
The camera shows Sentinel Prime inside his vault, with just a bare flicker of blue Energon inside his eye...meaning, he is still alive, but very damaged...waiting.
When the astronauts splash down in the Pacific with their haul from the moon, NASA takes special TOP SECRET silver boxes into possession containing this Cybertronian technology. Though not seen, it's implied the Soviets are doing the same thing whenever possible on their own missions...meaning Autobot technology arrived on Earth long before the events of the first Transformers film in 2007.
The film picks up in present day with Sam Witcicky (Shia LaBeouf) now living in Washington, DC with a beautiful British-accented girlfriend named Carly Spencer (Rosie Huntington-Whitely). Carly bought Sam a giant plush rabbit for his luck to change in what's been a fruitless job search since his graduation from an unnamed Ivy League school. Sam can't find a job in the current economy, despite "having saved the world twice"...which is a fact no one outside the government supposedly knows, since the events of the previous two Transformers films have been exhaustively covered up by world governments. Sam is shown receiving a medal of thanks from President Obama in the Oval Office, in a rushed non-ceremony that took less than five seconds before he was shuffled off into a hallway, his proud parents Judy and Ron Witwicky (Julie White and Kevin Dunn) watching. Carly worked at the White House at the time, as a member of the British embassy assigned to a post there. Sam met Carly shortly after his medal non-ceremony, and the two bonded as Sam accidentally knocked over a historic crystal bowl that smashed in front of the two of them (causing embarrassment no doubt). Carly is now working as the curator for an extensive art and rare cars collection owned by billionaire Dylon Gould (Patrick Dempsey) and his company, which began as an accounting firm and now contains venture capital divisions too. Carly has been supporting Sam, and letting him live rent-free in the massive, ornate (but run-down) apartment in DC while he looks for jobs. Carly even gives Sam "lunch money" every day, which he resents, since in his opinion a guy who saved the world -- TWICE -- and has a presidential medal to prove it should not need to get lunch money from his girlfriend.
Sam is without his friend Bumblebee since the Autobots have been deployed around the world hunting down the remaining Decepticons who still inhabit the Earth since the events of the last movie, Revenge of the Fallen. Around the world, "Energon Detectors" have been setup in all the major cities, which apparently have the ability to detect Transformers. Bumblebee is off on secret missions without Sam, and it seems the Autobots have little contact with Sam anymore...save for Wheelie (a toy truck) and Brains (a ghetto-voiced weird little robot that has white hair and never transforms) who live with Sam like pets. Sam keeps these two robots in a cage and makes them stay outside with his dog most of the time, which the two resent. We learn from the robots that Sam's last girlfriend (played by Megan Fox), was mean to them and that they're glad she's gone. This is a quick explanation why Fox is not in the movie and has been replaced by Carly (nodding to the reality that Fox alienated herself from Director Michael Bay and Producer Steven Speilberg and was not asked to return for this third film).
Sam's parents, Ron and Judy, have been traveling the country in a suped-up bus with all the bells and whistles, and though they said they would be visiting him on the 21st of that month, they show up several weeks early...unannounced. They chide Sam for not having a job...and ridicule him that "his car" Bumblebee currently has a job while he doesn't. Sam tells his parents that he has many job interviews lined up, and they insist on driving him to them since his car is a piece of junk. Sam's mother has a profane way of putting things and is incredibly blunt. The two, in addition to Wheelie and Brains, are supposed to serve as comic relief interspersed throughout the film, as they believe Sam is a slacker and want to make sure he keeps ahold of his hot girlfriend Carly, since Judy especially doesn't believe Sam will "get a third one" like these in terms of girlfriend...especially without a job.
While this is happening, the Autobots are off on various missions around the globe, hunting down Decepticons, and also looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction. There is a quick scene where they take down what appears to be the Iranian nuclear program, and another where the NEST agents from the previous films are working parallel to the Autobots to track other technological anomalies around the globe. In the Ukraine, there's something inside the ruins of Chernobyl that needs NEST's attention. NEST is the "international task force" that was setup in the first Transformers movie to work alongside the Autobots, and put these robots under human governmental control. Major Lennox (Josh Duhamel) is the returning NEST operative from previous films; he meets with a Ukrainian official about something alien the Soviets were monkeying with that caused the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. Lennox and his team suit up in their protective gear, since Chernobyl will be radioactive for another 20,000 years...the ruins of a merry-go-round, a school, and various Soviet monuments remain in the abandoned city. The Ukrainian official does not wear any protective gear, saying it doesn't matter because he will not live much longer anyway. He escorts Lennox and his team into a secret underground complex beneath a school in Chernobyl to show him what "really" caused the disaster there. The audience gets a glimpse of Laserbeak (now a weird vulture transformer) spying on the NEST team in the dark.
It appears the Soviets recovered part of the Autobot Ark's engine, somehow, on various space missions in the late 1960s. After attempting to reverse-engineer the technology, the USSR thought it could power Chernobyl with this engine piece and attempted to bring the facility online in 1986...with the disastrous result of obliterating the city. The engine part has been sitting there since then, and the NEST team mounts an effort to remove it to Washington, DC for safekeeping. Suddely, a monstrous Decepticon drilling machine with massive tentacles bursts through the ground and attempts to steal the engine piece. Lennox and his team have to fight this beast until the Autobots arrive as reinforcements. The giant Decepticon looks like a sandworm from Dune or Beetlejuice, and has the ability to "swim" in and out of the earth, destroying buildings as it goes. Optimus Prime and a cadre of various Autobot sports cars arrive to fight this unnamed Decepticon...who ends up being just a minion of ShockWave, who maintains his iconic cyclops form from the 1980s cartoon (but oddly never transforms into anything during the movie). Shockwave is very quickly defeated as Optimus Prime uses the giant sword and axe he stores in the trailer part of his truck form to beat-up ShockWave. The Autobots recover the engine part and return to DC with NEST.
Laserbeak finds the Ukrainian official that guided NEST to the engine part and assassinates him, telling the man he has outlived his usefullness to the Decepticons.
Meanwhile, in Africa, Megatron has survived events from the last film and is tooling around the Serengeti as a massive Mad Max-inspired post-apocalyptic truck. His head is badly damaged and teems with robot spiders and mechanical flies. He is clearly more insane than ever, and has been gathering scrap metal to feed the collection of oddball Decepticons that remain with him (including one that's a giant head with a long metal long that dances around Megatron, for "comic relief" apparently). Soundwave is now a car-transformer of some sort, having abandoned the satellite form he took in the last film. Laserbeak arrives in Africa to report to Megatron on what happened at Chernobyl. Megatron then dispatches Laserbeack to assassinate other humans who have been helping Decepticons but are now no longer needed.
Back in DC, Sam begins interviewing at various corporations, all of whom have something to do with the international relations/private-public partnerships field he got his Ivy League degree in. Because jobs are scarce and Sam has never worked anywhere before, he's not having any luck with his interviews. Many people have Googled Sam and refer to the FBI warrant that was issued for him in 2007 during the first film, which Sam has to explain as "a misunderstanding that's been expunged from his records". This is still keeping Sam from getting a job, so there's more complaint from him about having saved the world twice, without anything positive to show for it, like a job. Finally, Sam interviews with Bruce (John Malkovitch) at a global communications firm named Accuretta. This company is a tense and insane place to work, with each floor color-coded so that someone drinking a red cup on a "yellow floor" is disciplined for breaking the harmony of the office. Bruce is a real stickler for details like this, and seems like an ogre to work for. He tells Sam that he must start work in the mail room before he can do anything important, but Sam has a hard time accepting the demotion from world-saver to mail room boy. Bruce tells him that he received a letter of recommendation from someone on the Board of Directors so that Sam has a job there if he wants it. Without other prospects, Sam takes the job, but wonders who on the Board recommended him since he did not think anyone in high places was helping him find work.
At the NEST headquarters in DC (hidden in what appears to be the Department of Health and Human Services), Optimus Prime is furious with the humans for not revealing the existence of the engine part recovered at Chernobyl. This is because Optimus was assured that humans had shared everything they knew about the Transformers with him. The Director of the National Security Agency, Charlotte Mearing (Frances McDormand), arrives to explain what happened and that even she was not aware of the engine piece until very recently, since it was beyond Top Secret. Buzz Aldrin makes a cameo as himself in a scene where he and other NASA officials brief Optimus on the crashed alien ship they discovered on the moon in the 1960s. Optimus realizes the ship is the Autobot Ark, containing Sentinel Prime and the technology the Autobots believe could have won them the Cybertronian Civil War if it hadn't disappeared 50 years ago. Plans are immediately launched to use the Autobots' spaceship to head to the moon and investigate the crash site to see if Sentinel Prime is still alive and if the technology is still in the vault.
When the Autobots arrive, they indeed find Sentinel Prime, who appears almost dead. There are also 5 floating canisters of techonology floating around Sentinel that are brought back to Earth as well. Back at the NEST headquarters, Optimus uses the Matrox of Leadership inside his chest to revive Sentinel -- this is a small blue-energon-glowing object that Optimus can make float in the air outside his body. Exposition reveals it is the only thing in the universe that can give life to a Transformer and only Optimus has control of it. Sentinel reawakens and immediately tries to kill Optimus, thinking he was still on the Ark in the heat of battle when he was deactivated. Sentinel is voiced by Leonard Nimoy and is designed to look vaguely like him (when he does transform in this film, he takes on the shape of a fire truck). Sentinel tells Optimus and NEST that the technology he possessed were the "pillars" that would have won the Autobots the war because they are able to transport Transformers from one place to another...so Optimus deduces this could have been used to transport the Autobots from Cybertron before they were decimated, so they could have mounted a tactical retreat to regroup and take back the planet before the war was lost. Optimus is sad that he failed and the Decepticons defeated the Autobots, and offers to give up leadership to Sentinel. Sentinel however, says that he does not know enough about this world and that Optimus should remain the Autobots' leader, and that there was nothing Optimus could have done to win the war.
While this reunion is happening and Sentinel is filling NEST in regarding the "pillars" and the advanced technology he designed, Sam is feeling threatened by Carly's very successful boss, Dylan Gould (Patrick Dempsey). Gould's offices are in a futuristic, gorgeous building (the location is actually the Milwaukee Museum of Art) where he keeps several gorgeous race cars in the lobby and all sorts of valuable art on the walls. There are also many photos of Gould and Carly prominently displayed, which Sam becomes very jealous of. Sam is there to pick Carly up from work as she does not have a car, but Sam's car is a broken down yellow hoopty that won't start. He's embarrassed when Gould catches him kicking his car to get the engine to work; Gould emasculates him by not only instantly fixing the engine, but also by telling Sam that HE was the Board Member of the Accuretta company that gave the job recommendation since he heard Sam was having trouble finding work. Sam thinks he should keep a closer eye on Carly since it's clear this very wealthy man Gould has designs on her.
Seymour Simmons (John Turturro), the former government agent turned conspiracy buff in the last film, has written a book and is on Bill O'Reilly's FOX show talking about the danger to humanity that Decepticons pose, but O'Reilly calls him a pinhead and essentially says the Decepticons are under control. Simmons tells O'Reilly to read his book and learn that there is much that's not known about the Transformers that the government will not tell anyone about, including all manner of secret deals and assassinations and the rest of what's contained in various conspiracy books.
Simmons is actually correct, because Laserbeak has been busy assassinating the humans who have been collaborating with the Decepticons. Sam begins working at Accuretta, in the mail room, and he's told that he must work there for two and a half years before he can be promoted to something more meaningful. He's dejected, but Carly comes to visit him and the whole office is impressed with his gorgeous girlfriend, including Bruce. Carly gives Sam a red cup full of red licorice as a first work day gift, even though Sam works on the "yellow floor" where only yellow cups are allowed. Because Carly is so beautiful, however, no one hassles Sam over this infraction. As Sam goes about his job, Jerry Wang (Ken Jeung from The Hangover and other movies) stalks Sam -- and it's not clear why, though it's implied Wang might have a crush on Sam. When Sam goes to the bathroom, Wang burts into the stall with Sam and the two have an uncomfortable bit where several gay jokes are made, with Wang calling himself "Deep Wang" and trying to explain he's making a 'Deep Throat" Watergate/conspiracy reference. Wang claims he has the secret intel on what the Decepticons are really up to and then drops his pants very close to Sam's face; Wang has hidden drawings and notes in a roll of papers that he kept inserted in his underwear so the Decepticons would never find it. He gives this to Sam by jamming it very close to Sam's face -- in a moment that's designed to make the audience groan and wince. Sam takes the papers from Wang, just as Bruce comes into the bathroom and notes the commotion going on in the stall. Wang then leaves the stall with his pants down and approaches Bruce and stares him down in a macho contest; normally Bruce is the alpha male in a room, but Wang clearly bests him. Sam leaves the stall also and it looks like Wang and Sam were doing something sexual in the bathroom together, but Bruce does not say anything about it.
Sam then later tries to find Wang in his office to confront him about making Bruce think the two were up to something in the bathroom. Wang is having a conversation with someone, and has a computer mouse on his hand that's glowing red with nasty looking spikes. The mouse appears to be controlling him, and Wang keeps telling Sam to go away and that he doesn't know Sam. Finally, when Sam leaves, Laserbeak transforms from a computer screen and tells Wang that his usefulness has come to an end, and he must have an "accident". Wang tries to shoot Laserbeak, but Laserbeak just throws Wang and his chair out the window. Bruce is in a meeting and sees Wang fall to his death out the window, but reacts by telling everyone in the office to get back to work and ignore what's happening, since staring a the dead body will not bring Wang back to life. Bruce tells Sam he needs to remove Wang's name from his parking space and get someone to clean out his office, showing no concern for the fact that someone just died in the office. Laserbeak has now transformed into a copier/printer and is waiting for Sam to walk by so he can assassinate Sam too. Laserbeak misses Sam and there is a large fight at the office, which Sam escapes.
Sam gets Carly and they try to force their way into NEST headquarters in DC at the Health and Human Services building. At first the guards give them a hard time, but Bumblebee shows up and vouches for Sam and he and Carly are allowed inside. There, Mearing is upset Sam and Carly are being allowed near all the government secrets, but Lennox says that Sam knows all about the Autobots and that Carly knows too, so they should have security clearance. Mearing sits down with Sam and Carly and tells the two of them that they can't be involved in what's going on, but Sam keeps insisting that humans are working for the Decepticons and that the whole thing is linked to Sentinel Prime somehow...that there's a big plot with Sentinel Prime being the key. Mearning interprets this to mean that the Decepticons are going to try to assassinate Sentinel Prime, and though she doesn't give Sam credit, she appears to mobilize her team to protect Sentinel.
Sam then heads home, where he tries to contact Simmons to let him know the Decepticons are trying to kill him. Simmons' assistant, Alan Tudyk, won't put the call through at first, but eventually Sam talks to him and tells him about the "dark side of the moon" and the assassination conspiracy and Simmons agrees to come to Sam and help. Soon, Sam is in his apartment with Simmons and Bruce stops by because he wants to see at least one Autobot, and this was leverage Sam used to get Bruce to give him Wang's files, so they can figure out why Decepticons wanted to kill Sam, and killed Wang. Carly comes home as all these people are convened in her apartment and she's not happy. Sam gets upset that Gould has now given Carly a very expensive Mercedes car, worth over $200,000. The two of them have a little fight over this but Carly tells him not to be jealous. Carly goes upstairs while Sam and the other men there try to figure out what the Decepticons are up to since they don't believe Mearing and the government will be smart enough to stop them in time. They decide to go to follow a lead that Simmons has with former Soviet cosmonauts who defected in the 1970s and are hiding in the US, since the Soviets suddenly abandoned their space program and they need to know why.
At a Russian bar somewhere, Simmons, Sam, and the other guys get into a fight with several women who work as bartenders or escorts there. Once the fighting is over, several former cosmonauts tell them that the Soviets sent an unmanned photographic robot to the moon that took pictures of strange "rock formations" that appeared to have tread marks near them. Sam realizes those were not rocks, but were instead hundreds if not thousands of "pillars". He deduces that the Decepticons knew where the Autobots' Ark was this whole time and that whatever they have been up to was NOT about finding out what was on the moon, but about keeping what was on the moon hidden. Sam figures out that all this time the Decepticons were using humans at NASA, in the Soviet space agency, and in private companies like Accuretta to prevent more space missions to the moon and to conceal the fact that the Autobot Ark was there...all the while the Decepticons had already found Sentinel Prime and the "pillar's and were up to something big and decades-in-the-planning. Sam and the other men decide to race to NEST headquarters to tell Mearing and the others there everything they've figured out.
The Decepticons do try to go after Sentinel Prime, who was driving around DC as a fire truck for some reason. There is a pursuit, which Sam eventually takes part in, where three Decepticons disguised as black SUVs chase Sentinel back to NEST headquarters. Simmons is yanked out of his car and thrown onto the road, where he is crippled (he then remains in a wheelchair for the rest of the movie). One of the Decepticons looks like a panther in robot form, one looks like a werewolf, and one looks like the Predator, with dreds like that alien. There is a big fight and Sam is thrown out of Bumblebee and starts screaming, with Bumblebee catching him in the air and putting him back inside his body before transforming back into car form. This is really just an excuse to do special effects and have an action sequence here in the movie, with a lot of explosions and the chase scene back to NEST headquarters.
When they get back to NEST, Sentinel Prime kills one of the Autobots who was guarding him and tells everyone that he has been working with the Decepticons the whole time. There are thousands of "pillars' hidden all around the planet, which the Decepticons plan to use to teleport Cybertron via a space bridge into Earth's atmosphere. Sentinel then admits he knew the war was lost on Cybertron so he negotiated a deal with Megatron to bring the pillars to Earth, set them up, and teleport Cybertron here so the Transformers could take all of Earth's resources and rebuild Cybertron together. This was a deal Sentinel made "to save our kind", since he saw that the Civil War between the Autobots and Decepticons had devastated Cybertron and brought them all close to destruction. A big fight ensues, with Sentinel then escaping...to presumably join the Decepticons to implement his master plan.
Sam needs to find Carly, who has gone to meet with Gould at Gould's request, in his giant mansion somewhere. The car Gould gave Carly is actually Soundwave, who takes Carly prisoner so Gould can get Sam to cooperate. Gould reveals that his father was an agent of the Decepticons before him, and that the takeover of Earth has been underway for decades. Those who have been collaborating with the Decepticons have been promised a decent life once they took over. There is no way to resist them. Gould wants Sam to become a spy and find out how Optimus Prime plans on fighting back now that everything is coming out into the open. Gould says he will kill Carly if Sam does not cooperate, and also gets a wristwatch transformer to attach itself to Sam's body...which will force Sam to do what Gould wants, using great physical pain to achieve this.
Meanwhile, Sentinel Prime takes to the airwaves ordering the nations of the world to expel the Autobot "rebels" from the planet or else the Decepticons will attack the main cities and kill many people. The US Congress votes quickly to boot the Autobots with the UN and other foolish bodies doing the same. The US government ends the NEST program and tells the Autobots to get on a shuttle and go to another planet. All of this happens with ridiculous speed, and Sam suddenly is in Florida where the last US space shuttle is attached to an Autobot spaceship so NASA can make sure the Autobots really leave. This ship is called the "Xanthion" and it has been built by Autobot NASCARs called "The Wreckers", who have British punk voices. Major Epps (Tyrese Gibson) from the previous movies has been in charge of getting the Autobots off the planet.
Sam has an emotional moment with Optimus and Bumblebee before they board the ship to leave Earth. Once it blasts off, Starscream appears out of nowhere and attacks the shuttle, destroying it, and presumably killing everyone on board. Sam cries and Epps comforts him. The two of them decide they need to figure out where Sentinel Prime and the Decepticons have gone. Suddenly, Sam's phone rings and it's Gould, asking him what Optimus Prime told him regarding their plans to defeat the Decepticons. Sam tells him the Autobots had no plan and just left, but were then killed by Starscream. Gould then makes Sam feel worse by making it clear that Carly is his now and that Sam has to accept that. Epps realizes the NSA can track Gould's phone call, and they realize it came from within Trump Tower in Chicago...so everyone makes plans to go there.
In Washington, DC, however, Sentinel Prime and Megatron meet at the Lincoln Memorial, which Megatron has repurposed for himself, smashing Lincoln out of his throne and taking it for himself. Sentinel then assembles some of the "pillars" to open a space bridge to the moon...where it is revealed many Decepticons have been hiding for 50 years. They all come through the space bridge along with giant Decepticon transport ships. Once they arrive on Earth, these robots scan various vehicles and take Earth disguises for their alternate forms...garbage trucks, police cars, fire engines, etc. The Decepticons decide to dead to Chicago to assemble the "pillars" into a giant system to teleport Cybertron to Earth...though there is no reason given why they need to do this in Chicago and not in DC, where they all are at the moment.
In Chicago, Sentinel Prime takes over the Jeweler's Building on the Chicago River and makes it his headquarters. In one of the cupolas of this very ornate building, Sentinel hides the master control pillar that will activate all the other pillars around the globe that Decepticons will use to teleport Cybertron to Earth. There is a montage of Decepticons launching pillars into the air in the jungles of South America, Africa, Asia, and in cities like Tokyo. There are thousands of these pillars that will be launched into the atmosphere to make Sentinel's plan work. In Chicago, Sentinel gives the order for this all to proceed, and the Decepticons arrive in force to start shelling the various buildings of downtown Chicago, with most of the fighting taking place in the Loop and around the landmark buildings that face the river and the lake. Gould has Carly inside Trump Tower, and he explains to her that the Decepticons are going to use the 6 billion people of Earth as slaves to rebuild Cyberton with Earth's mineral resources. Gould tells her that he and the other collaborators have been helping so they can be kept as pets and not slaves, as this is the only way to survive. Gould wants Carly to be a pet with him and serve the Decepticons.
Sam and Epps try to contact as many NEST members as possible and get them to Chicago. Apparently, all of these people have the ability to travel great distances in mere seconds so they all assemble on Chicago's south side and attempt to storm the city, which Decepticons have made into a fortress. The US air force is trying to shoot missiles at the Decepticons, but there are anti-aircraft hover guns that shoot these and the planes down. NEST decides to send Lennox and other operatives into Chicago via parachute, since the Decepticons apparently can't pick up these chutes on radar. While Sam and the others try to make it to Trump Tower on foot, Lennox and his team parachute in. These guys use Willis Tower (which you know as Sears Tower) as a shield and avoid various flying Decepticons as they make their way to the ground. All manner of random Decepticons are shown smashing the buildings of Chicago, with giant Decepticon troop ships flying in the air along the river randomly blowing holes in the buildings for no reason.
Suddenly, all the pillars activate and Cybertron is teleported into Earth's atmosphere.
Sam is now in the Loop with Epps and the others and everyone figures out that they must destroy the southeast cupola of the Jewelers' Building for the Cybertron teleportation to end. The last hour of the film deals with various attempts to do this, with Sam, Epps, Carly, and Lennox being pummeled by various random Decepticons. Ultimately, the sandworm drilling Decepticon from Chernobyl that's controlled by ShockWave arrives and destroys a glass office building that Sam and Carly were in -- for about 20 minutes the building is collapsing on itself or teetering over the river with unnamed Decepticons trying to kill Sam and Carly, while Lennox is on the ground attempting to get a clear shot of the cupola where Sentinel's control pillar is located. Finally, Sam and Carly and various NEST agents slide down the side of the building to escape Decepticons and ultimately make it onto the ground. During this fight, Laserbeak is killed when Sam and Carly jump onto a Decepticon flying gun ship and hover outside the building for a while, during which time Bumblebee cuts Laserbeak's head off.
Lennox and his team climb to the top of the Tribune Tower and start shooting the eyes out of various Decepticons on the ground, who all shout "My eyes! I can't see!" as other NEST agents then plant explosives on the robots' feet to kill them. BumbleBee has been captured, and Sam and Carly are trying to find him in all the chaos of this battle.
On Michigan Avenue in front of the Wrigley Building, Soundwave and Starscream decide to execute Autobot prisoners, including an Autobot inventor named Wheeljack who was made to look like Albert Einstein. Sam and Carly need to rescue BumbleBee before he is killed too, and they create a diversion as the NEST snipers shoot more Decepticon eyes out.
Carly and Sam get separated again, with Carly eventually finding Megatron talking to himself in an alley while sitting on garbage dumpsters. She tells Megatron that he might be winning this battle but that in the end Sentinel Prime will be seen as the real winner, since it was his plan and when Cybertron gets there Sentinel will no longer need Megatron.
This makes Megatron jealous and he storms away to kill Sentinel.
Lennox and his team manage to shoot the southeastern cupola of the Jeweler's Building and disable the pillar that controls Cybertron's teleportation. When they do this, Cybertron disappears into space again. Sentinel then orders all Decepticons to fire on Autobots in the area so he can restart the teleporting. Gould gets to the pillar, which was completely undamanged, right as Sam makes it there himself. Gould and Sam fight, with Gould intending on restarting the teleportation. He pushes the button to start things up again and Cybertron appears once more above Earth, but then Sam pushes Gould into the pillar and he short-circuits it, killing Gould. Cybertron then implodes and is destroyed when all of the pillars stop operating and Earth is saved.
All of a sudden, magic blue lights appear above Chicago that zap all of the Decepticon ships and many random Decepticons up into the sky so they are destroyed along with Cybertron. Possibly this is all the Decepticon forces that were teleported from the moon to Earth, and when the pillars stopped operating anything that had been teleported got destroyed because the Decepticons where were not teleported are not affected.
Sentinel Prime and Optimus are having a fight on the State Street bridge over the Chicago River. They have a talk about Sentinel wanting to save their race and how the Transformers were gods on Cybertron but were treated as mere machines on Earth, and that humans should bow to them. Optimus tells Sentinel he is wrong but in the middle of the fight Megatron murders Sentinel.
Then Megatron and Optimus start fighting and within a minute or two Optimus pulls out a giant axe and cuts Megatron's head off. All sorts of nasty little spiders and flies pour out.
Chicago is in ruins and the Autobots and NEST agents celebrate the Decepticons being defeated. Sam and Carly hug each other, with Bumblebee watching them. Bumblebee then vomits little gears and bits of metal all over the ground, picking up a few pieces and giving them to Carly and Sam...before he starts playing wedding music. Sam tells Bumblebee to stop being so pushy and to let Carly and Sam's relationship continue without his prodding.
The credits start to roll...but are then stopped with a shot of Simmons, in a wheelchair, talking to Mearing on the roof of a building somewhere, reminding her of an affair the two of them shared years ago. Mearing tells the NSA agents to arrest Simmons for disrespected her, and Simmons smiles at her, and she smiles back.
The credits then continue again.

Did you see that Kobe expanded your sock puppets to include AsimovLives?
Wow, he must think you're Dr. Manhattan.
Sometimes I think there's a sweatshop in Portugal full of immigrants typing away 24-7, how prolific Asi is.

And i was on board for the spectacle. But even that was by and large a let down. The problem with this type of film, to really make it work there needs to be a strong narrative flow. You can have the sound and the fury, but it has to make narrative sense, even if the story is on the weak saide. Michael Bay *did* understand this, both Armageddon and The Rock are two absolutely classic examples of movies that built their action and suspense and didn't get lost up their own ass while continually moving the story along.
Was it better than Transformers 2? Sure. But thats not exactly hard to do.
Transformers? No.
Any other Michael Bay film? No.
The first two hours of this film are an exercise in pain as we move from one hacked up Sam Witwicky scene to the next as it flails around haphazardly setting up a 'story'. The problem is that it doesn't flow, and without the flow the scenes.. each and every one of them drag the movie to a halt.
Then another tries.
Then another tries.
And frankly, i think the 3D did a whole lot to castrate Bay then anything else because he can't seem to hook two scenes together and get them to flow together. So what you end up with is a collection of scenes rather than a coherent film. And while the story can be weak, the action can be large, if you don't have a driving narrative flow an action movie is over before it even begins. Go back and watch Armageddon again if you want to see what Bay can do when he puts his mind to it.
Its sad to see Massawyrm like this because i largely feel like he's apologizing for it. I honestly wish Michael Bay would declare "Mission Accomplished!" and move on to other more down-to-earth action films that don't feature Killer Robots.

This talkback is epic. Somebody should adapt it into a movie starring Shia LaBouf.
I just want to apologize to anyone who was irritated that I posted the same thing 1000 times (unintentionally), and to say that I've thought carefully about it and come to the conclusion that my total irritation with Bay's Transformer movies comes from two places: First, a desire to see some version of a Transformer film that bears any meaningful relation to the Transformers I grew up thinking were cool, and second, a desire to see movies that tell good stories well and use special effects and action to accomplish that end rather than as ends in themselves.
I realize now that those desires are selfish. There are people who need empty, bland storytelling, meaningless spectacle, and idiotic stock characters. People who have not yet figured out how to check out women on the internet or in magazines or on billboards or anywhere else in society. People who, in short, need Michael Bay in their lives. And they need him to make Transformers movies, because otherwise he'd have to come up with his own ideas for films, and it's pretty clear there's not much going on in his head, plotwise.
Instead of thinking about the way every Bay movie prevents a decent TF film from existing, I need to think "every Bay TF movie prevents a bay X-Men movie from getting made" and be satisfied with that.
On the other hand, I really wish I could see the movie he would have made using the screenplay from "Winter's Bone".

I'd love for Transformers to be made by people who actually like and understand the source material.
Yep, the cartoon was dumb, but there's a whole ton of comics (Marvel, Dreamwave, IDW) to use as inspiration, and the material in those is every bit as adult as that found in Batman comics and graphic novels.
Would Harry Knowles, Massawyrm etc, like it if an X-Men movie featured the US millitary and stupid comedy characters, with the main protagonist not even being a mutant, with Magneto and Xavier only having a couple of lines of dialogue, and the rest of the X-Men none?
One way to make a good Transformers movie would be to hire a director who actually likes Transformers.

Because my version was like drinking a catbox smoothie and realizing after you finally chug it all down that there's still another half-glassful left in the pitcher. But alas, the smoothie DID have a cherry on top in the form of the prologue, which shows that Mr. Bay does indeed have SOME talent (or at least a competent second director).
And for the record, I was able to distinguish between a good film and a piece of shit even when I was 13. "Transformers" is the type of film that a studio deserves to be bankrupted by.

I usually trust the guy. He's one of several reviewers that put me off TF2...I didn't catch that one until I was able to borrow a friend's Redbox rental.
Still...this is a hell of a recommendation. Fuck it, I'll bite.

Some interesting ones too. They seem to be changing the rules o how this site operates every other day.
So what did you exactly do to generate the line of HA's? Just do a bunch of repeating characters?
Let's test..
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!